carlehewitt

6 ms·

1.
by carlehewitt 7y ago
In his famous 1936 article, Turing correctly noted that proof of the computational undecidabilty of halting problem does not involve the same fixed point as the one used by Gödel. See the following: https://papers.ssrn.com/s
2.
by carlehewitt 7y ago
There is a strongly-typed definition of Y here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3418003
3.
by carlehewitt 7y ago
BTW, the Church/Turing theory of computation is not universal for digital computation as explained in the following article: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3418003
4.
by carlehewitt 7y ago
'Setq' and 'rplacd' also do not provide the power of Actors. See the following: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3418003
5.
by carlehewitt 7y ago
Schemer (later renamed Scheme) was invented to scheme against Actors reprising Conniver, which was invented to connive against Planner. See the following for the current state of the art including the latest Actor approach to Eval, which is
6.
Highly-Secure Backdoors(papers.ssrn.com)
1 points by carlehewitt 7y ago|0 comments
7.
Scalable Intelligent Systems by 2025(papers.ssrn.com)
1 points by carlehewitt 7y ago|0 comments
8.
Internet of Traitorous Things(papers.ssrn.com)
2 points by carlehewitt 7y ago|0 comments
9.
For Cybersecurity, Computer Science Must Rely on Strongly-Typed Actors(hal.archives-ouvertes.fr)
2 points by carlehewitt 7y ago|0 comments
10.
Citadels: Faster response and better information integration than datacenters(papers.ssrn.com)
3 points by carlehewitt 7y ago|0 comments
11.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
There will be zillions of different kinds of Actor in a massive inconsistency robust ontology, each with a different implementation although constructed on a common system.
12.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
Amdahl's law imposes no performance limitation on a system which does not have a sequential part. Having a sequential part is a bad idea because it is a single point of failure.
13.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
This is a very good question. Citadels are larger scale Actors which can be incorporated into other Citadels, where a Citadel is an Actor for a systems of Actors (perhaps including IoT). See the following: http://web.stanford
14.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
Every Actor has a region of mutual exclusion. However, the region of mutual exclusion can have holes so that * activities can be suspended and later resumed * other activities can use the region of mutual exclusion while a m
15.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
In a wide-ranging discussion, there were some fundamental disagreements among the panelists as follows: I disagreed with Tony Hoare about using synchronous communication as the primitive because it is too slow for both IoT and many-core chi
16.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
The Actor Model is a formalization of what needs to be done for IoT and many-core computers. The ideas were circulating widely before work began on Erlang even if the engineers did not read the literature.
17.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
Erlang lacks holes in the region of mutual exclusion of an Actor making it very difficult to things like a readers/writer scheduler for a database. See the following: http://web.stanford.edu/class/ee380/Abstra
18.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
Actually, the Actor Model generalizes Concurrent ML because message and types are Actors. For example, if anAccount:Account then the following anAccount.deposit[$5] is defined as follows: Account.send[anAccount. deposit[$5
19.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
Massive Inconsistency Robust Ontologies will have trillions of Actors on a many-core computer. Please see the YouTube video here: http://web.stanford.edu/class/ee380/Abstracts/190123.html
20.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
In a wide ranging discussion, there were some fundamental disagreements among the panelists as follows: I disagreed with Tony Hoare about using synchronous communication as the primitive because it is too slow for both IoT and many-core chi
21.
Video of Panel Discussion with Tony Hoare, Joe Armstrong, and Carl Hewitt(youtube.com)
1 points by carlehewitt 8y ago|1 comments
22.
Interview of Professor Carl Hewitt(youtube.com)
5 points by carlehewitt 8y ago|0 comments
23.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
Professor Hewitt has a blog with more info here: https://professorhewitt.blogspot.com/
24.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
Also related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7erJ1DV_Tlo
25.
Scalable Intelligent Systems: Build and Deploy by 2025(youtube.com)
3 points by carlehewitt 8y ago|1 comments
26.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
An Actor is not a sequential process because it does not have a program counter that moves sequentially through a program. You might find Actors more intuitive. For example, see the following video by Hewitt, Meijer and Szyperski: The Ac
27.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
Induction is the most important principle for proving properties of programs. The principle of Actor induction is: 1. Suppose that an Actor x has property P when it is created. 2. Further suppose that if x has property P when it re
28.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
Yes, conditional critical regions can be slower because conditions can be redundantly tested. Below is an Actor implementation of a read priority solution to the readers writers problem: ReadPriority[aDatabase:*ReadersWriter*]:*ReadersW
29.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
Simulated time is not the basis of real concurrency. Simula-67 (Dahl and Nyaaard) used co-routines in which there was no parallel execution.
30.
by carlehewitt 8y ago
Strictly speaking an Actor is not a CSP process, because an Actor does not have its own stack and does not have its own program counter that moves sequentially through a program.

More ›