Viewing profile — carlehewitt
carlehewitt
HN member- Joined
- Thu, Aug 02, 2018, 10:33 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 145
- Public activity
- 64 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About carlehewitt
Professor Hewitt’s recent research centers on the area of Inconsistency Robustness, i.e., system performance in the face of continual, pervasive inconsistencies (a shift from the previously dominant paradigms of inconsistency denial and inconsistency elimination, i.e., to sweep inconsistencies under the rug). ActorScript and the Actor Model on which it is based can play an important role in the implementation of more inconsistency-robust information systems. Hewitt is an advocate in the emerging campaign against mandatory installation of Internet backdoors in the Internet of Things.
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #20700960
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. …
-
comment
Comment #20700948
There is a strongly-typed definition of Y here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3418003
-
comment
Comment #20700933
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=341…
-
comment
Comment #20700921
'Setq' and 'rplacd' also do not provide the power of Actors. See the following: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3418003
-
comment
Comment #20700905
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 t…
- story
- story
- story
- story
- story
- story
-
comment
Comment #19217755
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.
-
comment
Comment #19217725
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.
-
comment
Comment #19217709
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…
-
comment
Comment #19212243
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 …
-
comment
Comment #19210549
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 pri…
-
comment
Comment #19210454
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…
-
comment
Comment #19210379
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.st…
-
comment
Comment #19210297
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 f…
-
comment
Comment #19210240
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/1901…
-
comment
Comment #19209602
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 pri…
- story
- story
-
comment
Comment #19113935
Professor Hewitt has a blog with more info here: https://professorhewitt.blogspot.com/
-
comment
Comment #19038655
Also related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7erJ1DV_Tlo