> He sketches out a hypothetical “Turing Machine,” proving that, if something is computable at all, a machine (in principle) can handle it.
That's not what Turing proved. Instead, what he proved in his paper was that there are some problems which aren't solvable by Turing Machines (and therefore presumably by any machine). That's the Entscheidungsproblem (decision problem) referenced in the title.
What TFA references is the so-called Church-Turing-Thesis, which is exactly that, a thesis. It can't really be proven although we have very strong reason to believe it given that in almost 100 years nobody has found a system of computation more powerful than Turing Machines.
And in 100 years we have gone completely the opposite direction in terms of where we think artificial intelligence lies. Rather than constructing a machine with all the known truths, modern searching for artificial intelligence using machines is mostly sifting through human commentary to create an organized feuilleton machine versus Leibniz's axiomatic approach
No, Turing had precisely that approach of feeding the machine with learning material in mind[1], but you have to build a machine apt to consume generic knowledge body before you throw at it anything.
There have also been attempts to canonicalize knowledge on the web (semantic web) and lots of things inside of computers are in fact deterministic.
But that is not the direction that AI seems to be taking, it is "smart" because it does a good job of parroting humans that sound "smart", not because it "knows" truths.
I beleive you are wrong that "nobody has found a system of computation more powerful than Turing Machines". A turing machine can not perform indeterminacy, however, the actor model can.
Non-deterministic Turing machines [1] are the standard way to define Non-deterministic complexity classes like NP or NEXP, so there are definitely Turing machines with indeterminacy.
I read that sentiment here a few years ago but couldn't get anything more out of it than actors can race, but a turing machine is determistic. I could very well have it wrong.
If you were computing with actors, and you also had a sufficiently-detailed spec about the actor model, is there some particular algorithm you could not compute by just executing a TLA+ spec of your actor algorithm using Turing-ish software?
That's not what Turing proved. Instead, what he proved in his paper was that there are some problems which aren't solvable by Turing Machines (and therefore presumably by any machine). That's the Entscheidungsproblem (decision problem) referenced in the title.
What TFA references is the so-called Church-Turing-Thesis, which is exactly that, a thesis. It can't really be proven although we have very strong reason to believe it given that in almost 100 years nobody has found a system of computation more powerful than Turing Machines.