[lit-ideas] Re: The Answering Machine

  • From: John Wager <john.wager1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 19:10:57 -0600

I wish I could blame the spell checker, but it wasn't the machine (or more properly the programmer of the spell checker?) but me. I was firing off a quick reply in a distracted state and I just added a detour to the original Turing.


Donal McEvoy wrote:
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?


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2012.0.1901 / Virus Database: 2109/4734 - Release Date: 01/10/12


------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: