On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 21:20:00 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:

> So, the questions really are: 1. Does it have to be human readable? 

That would be a "watch" by definition.  The usage that I have seen this 
is in the context of the book "The Invisible Watchmaker", and the premise 
(at least from the debates I've had with people who have read it; I have 
not) seems to be flawed as the idea is that a watch has to imply a 
watchmaker because a watch must be made by a maker.  Therefore, there 
must be a watchmaker or there'd be no watch.

The book, from what I've heard of it, uses the idea of a clockwork as its 
premise - something so mechanically complex that it must have been 
created rather than evolved or grown.

Jim

Post a reply to this message