Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
But @Clete 's mouse eating the Moon images weren't completely random. They both clearly expressed a mouse eating the Moon. But there were lots of differences in the details. But in the broadest sense, they both expressed a mouse eating the Moon. So are you saying that A.I. is like a tuned pseudorandom number generator, where certain variables have very fine tolerances, and others are left to vary pseudorandomly? And this is why each time you give the A.I. instantiation the same prompt, it gives you different results, but at the same time, also the same result? I mean a pseudorandom number generator is always giving you a number between 0 and 1 (meaning the mouse is always eating the Moon somehow), so in that sense, it's always giving you the same result, but technically even though the number is always between 0 and 1, it's basically never the same number as the one before (it's always a different picture of a mouse eating the Moon)? Like it's the same and different at the same time, but on different scales or something?You still can't understand this simple idea?
My point was that computer programs are complex and that the code can follow many different paths depending on design.... even if the input is the same, the output can be made to vary BY DESIGN.
The use of the random function, as an example, was to make simple the fact that you can call the SAME function multiple times, but get a DIFFERENT result each time, BY DESIGN.
The fact that the whole sequence of the random number generator is deterministic is irrelevant.