[lit-ideas] Re: The Answering Machine
- From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 00:39:33 +0000 (GMT)
John, could you clarify whether you mean 'Turing machine' where it says
'Touring machine'? (This may give me time to come up with an 'answer'.)
Donal
One post to go already
Salop
________________________________
From: John Wager <jwager@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, 11 January 2012, 0:13
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The Answering Machine
Donal McEvoy wrote:
"And indeed the phone itself is simply a vehicle of communication that
>itself does not communicate, so it is doubly wrong an
expression as we do not
>answer the phone but respond to the person ringing."
Would that mean the same thing for a "Touring machine?" Is it an "answering
machine" as well
that is only a means to respond to the person "ringing" the machine?
Is ANY machine that is programmed by people basically a complicated
"answering machine"
that allows communication between two human parties, or is a Touring
machine somehow NOT
an "answering machine" even if it's been programmed by someone in a
more complicated way than
(but basically similar to) a phone answering machine?
Other related posts:
