Re: modulo solving lacking domain?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg126862] Re: modulo solving lacking domain?
- From: Andrzej Kozlowski <akozlowski at gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 05:30:33 -0400 (EDT)
- Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
- References: <201206120659.CAA25892@smc.vnet.net> <C49675CE-DFFB-4759-A1FC-F853D06D2456@mimuw.edu.pl> <4FD7DD77.6040101@eecs.berkeley.edu> <88093364-D782-410D-8920-E66714C94086@gmail.com> <4FD8A1D4.2030201@eecs.berkeley.edu> <1D1918EF-72C2-4292-8573-C8D8FCD77B15@gmail.com> <4FD8EBC9.9020903@eecs.berkeley.edu>
On 13 Jun 2012, at 20:36, Richard Fateman wrote: > On 6/13/2012 12:26 PM, Andrzej Kozlowski wrote: >> >> But Mathematica does not "refuse" to do it - you are just using the wrong approach. > By that reasoning, anything that Mathematica fails to do yet is computable ( by a Turing machine, say) > can be done with Mathematica but using a different approach. > Have Mathematica simulate a Turing machine, and then the user can > write the program to solve the problem. > > The nice part of this reduction is that Mathematica can never be faulted. It is always the > user's fault for using the wrong approach. > > RJF > > So, presumably you prefer the "customer is always right" approach, i.e. the user never needs to learn anything or even think and whenever he does not like something it is always a "bug" even when the users who actually do learn things and do try to think, do not share this viewpoint and most likely would view the preferred behaviour of the "always right" user as a bug. Why should Wolfram care more about the first kind of users than the second? AK
- References:
- modulo solving lacking domain?
- From: Richard Fateman <fateman@cs.berkeley.edu>
- modulo solving lacking domain?