When we think of the glitches in a computer- freezing, skips in graphics, lag, etc . . .
Is it safe to assume that ALL of these, without exception, are essentially human error in programming code? I understand that, with the lines of binary code we work with today, there is virtually no way of ensuring a program will be entirely foolproof because no human eye could reasonably foolproof it and software hasn’t gotten to the point of foolproofing data by itself (and perhaps never will). So even though these are errors or faults, they are still logical faults.
But can anyone describe to me specific facts about transistors, such as flash drive, or in spintronics, about whether sometimes an electron might skip out of sync with its input dictation? I know computers can give us random results intentionally (eg: a random number along a function on a graphing calculator), but do they do it unintentionally?
Some transistor in a very large IC having millions can just stop operating, for any reason, maybe a cosmic ray hits it or it was just at the process limits when manufactured or some impurity got in it, or anything. A million transistor chip contains many connections, alot of metal, heat , it is quite complex physically, so some quirk error can occur. It is not always software. A neutrino from the sun hits a proton, or a cosmic ray particle hits a proton and damages the crystal…
also, even some dust on the chip can cause shortages in the electrical current. not usually in the processor cause thats super clean and housed in a protective plastic case, but on other areas of the motherboard this is entirely possible. thats why you should clean your computer every once in a while.
Thanks. My interest in this (and why it’s in “philosophy”) is because the argument comes up that artificial intelligence can start to “think” like we do, but only after there are random elements involved. A purely dictated intelligence is just echoing our own, and cannot “mistake” ideas by itself. Small changes like dust on a chip should not be interpreted as some sentience born in the machine, but likewise, we couldn’t automatically assume that the first proteins (repeating patterns of carbon and hydrogen dioxide) could automatically be considered as “life”