Skip to content
HHackerTube.videoSurprise me

Turing & The Halting Problem - Computerphile

Turing & The Halting Problem - Computerphile on HackerTube: recommended by 2 Hacker News commenters across 2 separate months, 2019–2022.

Computerphile

explainer · intro · evergreen

Open on YouTube

A Computerphile video in which Mark Jago of the University of Nottingham explains Turing's halting problem and how it led to the blueprint for the modern computer.

Why Hacker News recommends it

Offered as a short, clear explanation of the halting problem and its link to decidability.

people recommended it
2
separate months
2
strong recommendations
0
discussed on HN
2019–2022
“Here's a short video on it”
— gammalost, Jun 2021, in “DeepMind says reinforcement learning is ‘enough’ to reach general AI”

What HN commenters said

4 Hacker News comments link this video. Each one links back to its thread.

gammalostJun 2021Recommends

>Like what? The halting problem is (I think?) the standard example. Here's a short video on it ▶ this video

in “DeepMind says reinforcement learning is ‘enough’ to reach general AI” · View on HN

mar77iDec 2019Recommends

For one practical example, Gödel's incompleteness is directly related to decidability problems in CS. there's this glorious liar paradox machine discussed by Computerphile [0]. [0] ▶ this video

in “Kurt Gödel and the Mechanization of Mathematics” · View on HN

verdvermAug 2022Cites it

no, it's all in software because you can create any smart contract and it can call any other. There is a difference in knowing after the transaction has finalized and predicting beforehand, which is when you would want to block the transaction. ▶ this video

in “Tornado Cash and collateral damage” · View on HN

cartoonworldJul 2021Cites it

In my view, this isn't really a software problem. Your plan is on the right track though. We already know its neigh impossible to ensure software is bug and vuln free. We have to reckon with the fact that secure software is possible, but extremely hard and impractical to achieve with any regularity. Because of well known computer science problems such as the Halting Problem[0] and more that I am totally ignorant of, the only alternative is extremely thorough verification like happens in planes[1]. The rub is that unlike aerospace and other critical controls, we cannot define the software security problem as closely as is possible in those other critical systems. Doing so will undo the benefits of our general technology solutions. The reason I claim it is nonetheless not a software problem is: In case after case of these troubling examples of security failures, there are only a few organizational commonalities that link them all together. Time after time, there are shocking misconfigurations, corners cut, best practices eschewed, warnings ignored, processes disregarded or absent and swept under the rug. C-Suite execs, as has been well noted, opt for the checkbox-style silver-bullet-whiz-bang, because they can understand the value proposition of one-problem-one-fix and it is easy to communicate to stakeholders. They are totally ignorant to and uninterested in the details of actually providing a quality product. Their product is often not what they are selling; They are getting

in “Up to 1,500 businesses affected by ransomware attack, Kaseya CEO says” · View on HN

Topics & tags

Computability & complexity theoryhalting problemalan turingcomputabilitydecidabilitycomputer science theory