Live data from Hacker News

Actor Model of Computation (2010) [pdf]

arxiv.org

21–30 of 33 posts

Re: Actor Model of Computation (2010) [pdf]

#21
post #3

I find this resource confusing and annoying to read. When performing my thesis research I wasted a bunch of time trying to make sense of Hewitt's writing. I think a big problem is that the term "actor model" is so overloaded that it almost becomes meaningless. The actors that Hewitt is talking about is not at all the same as Erlang or Akka. As an example I consider this quote from the text nonsensical "Actor systems…

Probably, the most fundamental misunderstanding of the Actor Model is that it is based on "Event Loops" which require the following: When an Actor receives a message, it must run until it produces a response to the message and then loops back to receive another message. However, a ReadersWriter scheduler must be able to receive more read and write messages even while it is still processing a message as explained in https://www.amazon.com/Inconsistency-Robustness-Studies-Logi... Even so, a ReadersWriter scheduler must obey the Mutual Exclusion Principle, which says that only one activity can execute in an Actor at a time.

Another common misunderstanding is that an an Actor must have a mailbox, message queue, or event queue. There would be an infinite regress if any of these were required because since everything is an Actor, each of these would itself need a mailbox, message queue, or event queue!

Re: Actor Model of Computation (2010) [pdf]

#23

For a more recent description of the Actor Model and associated work, see the following: https://www.amazon.com/Inconsistency-Robustness-Studies-Logi... Also, those who will be in London on November 9 can come to my Code Mesh Keynote. See https://plus.google.com/+CarlHewitt-StandardIoT/posts/BXSZ7Y... It is fair to say that the implementation of Actors is still in its infancy. There is a startup in Silicon Valley tha…

> "Older publications are obsolete and unfortunately many of them have errors (including my own!). I wrote the Wikipedia article on the Actor Model but am no longer allowed to update it :-("

As someone who's been interested in the Actor Model recently, thanks for this statement, and the link to the book you've provided.

This would help avoid going down the wrong path.

Re: Actor Model of Computation (2010) [pdf]

#24
post #23

For a more recent description of the Actor Model and associated work, see the following: https://www.amazon.com/Inconsistency-Robustness-Studies-Logi... Also, those who will be in London on November 9 can come to my Code Mesh Keynote. See https://plus.google.com/+CarlHewitt-StandardIoT/posts/BXSZ7Y... It is fair to say that the implementation of Actors is still in its infancy. There is a startup in Silicon Valley tha…

> "Older publications are obsolete and unfortunately many of them have errors (including my own!). I wrote the Wikipedia article on the Actor Model but am no longer allowed to update it :-(" As someone who's been interested in the Actor Model recently, thanks for this statement, and the link to the book you've provided. This would help avoid going down the wrong path.

Thanks!

Additional information that you might find helpful is here: https://plus.google.com/+CarlHewitt-StandardIoT

Re: Actor Model of Computation (2010) [pdf]

#25
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Actor systems can perform computations that are impossible by Turing Machines" As a turing machine can compute anything that is computable it is therefore impossible for an Actor to do any computation that is not possible by a turing machine. This is computer science 101 and makes me wonder about the value of anything else said in the paper.

Well the interesting thing would be if that old lesson were violated. Of course it's sealed forever for a specific definition of 'compute,' but I'm still open to the idea that we find something which resembles computation enough that we call it the same thing, yet its precise definition is different enough from the one used in connection with contemporary theory of computation that old proofs of universality won't ne…

Message passing was omitted from the Turing Model. (Two Turing Machines cannot send messages to each other.)

Message passing is fundamental for IoT, etc.

Re: Actor Model of Computation (2010) [pdf]

#26
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actor systems are no more able to handle uncertainty than Turing Machines are, either via nondeterministic TMs or by deterministic TMs. This is basic computability theory.

That is wrong, Actor systems have a property called "Unbounded nondeterminism" nondeterministic TM have only bounded nondeterminism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbounded_nondeterminism

Jean is correct!

Of course, unbounded nondeterminism is a somewhat artificial example. However, the extra power of Actors over Turing Machines is critical for IoT and the implementation of Intelligent Systems.

Re: Actor Model of Computation (2010) [pdf]

#27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is wrong, Actor systems have a property called "Unbounded nondeterminism" nondeterministic TM have only bounded nondeterminism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbounded_nondeterminism

Jean is correct! Of course, unbounded nondeterminism is a somewhat artificial example. However, the extra power of Actors over Turing Machines is critical for IoT and the implementation of Intelligent Systems.

I'm sorry, but unless you produce a proof of hypercomputation with models that have unbounded determinism, you're a crank.

Re: Actor Model of Computation (2010) [pdf]

#28
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actor systems are no more able to handle uncertainty than Turing Machines are, either via nondeterministic TMs or by deterministic TMs. This is basic computability theory.

That is wrong, Actor systems have a property called "Unbounded nondeterminism" nondeterministic TM have only bounded nondeterminism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbounded_nondeterminism

Please produce a proof regarding how this makes the Actor Model more powerful than the traditional Turing Machines. I suspect you're a crank.

Re: Actor Model of Computation (2010) [pdf]

#29
post #4

Hewitt is now kind of a crank. When Hofstadter came over for the Symsys thing in Stanford a few years back, Hewitt handed Hofstadter a little sheet of paper saying that mere contradiction allowed axiomatic systems to transcend Godel incompleteness theorems. Hofstadter: "Thanks, Carl." and then he threw it away when Hewitt wasn't looking. I think there's a thread in Lambda the Ultimate.

Unfortunately, it is very common to have difficulty with paradigm shifts :-( Those of you near Denver can come to my BLAST 2018 lecture at 5PM on August 9 at the University of Denver with the following abstract: https://plus.google.com/+CarlHewitt-StandardIoT/posts/hh5CYE...

You really don't understand computability at all, do you?

Re: Actor Model of Computation (2010) [pdf]

#30
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, it is very common to have difficulty with paradigm shifts :-( Those of you near Denver can come to my BLAST 2018 lecture at 5PM on August 9 at the University of Denver with the following abstract: https://plus.google.com/+CarlHewitt-StandardIoT/posts/hh5CYE...

You really don't understand computability at all, do you?

Please don't make personal attacks—just post civilly and substantively.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN