You are sitting in a room full of filing cabinets. The only egress is a single slit in the wall. Paper comes through the slit, but all the writing is in Chinese. However, there are English instructions for taking the piece of paper, sorting through the filing cabinets, and using the contents of the cabinets (also in Chinese) to respond to the question on the piece of paper in Chinese. You push it back out through the slit, to the person on the other side.
If the person on the other side has their question answered, does this mean you “understand” Chinese?
– A Paraphrase of the Chinese Room Argument posed by John Searle in Behavioral and Brain Science, 1980.
Very timely post, Zach: we're discussing the cultural logic of the algorithm in class this week, a la Galloway (Essays in Algorithmic Culture).
Our discussion thus far contains several central points in common with what you've written here, especially the divide between theory and its practical application to (post)modern capitalist modes of production.
There are bits in here that I'd quibble with, but that's the way I am. =D Well done, indeed.
I must admit…the last videogame I got excited about was Super Mario Brothers for that giant grey game boy circa early 90s….BUT, I love the way your thoughts on human perception and computing. At the end of the day I feel like algorithms that mimic the human intellect would be like very well designed optical illusions: only as good as we perceive them to be. But never capable of truly doing what the real thing could (b/c as we know, human behavior is the single hardest thing to predict!). Ah improvisational theatre, so many good memories! I wonder if videogames are just another source for the storytelling we all seem to crave and feed on?