From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wupost!uunet!mcsun!uknet!warwick!nott-cs!ucl-cs!news Tue Jan 28 12:15:35 EST 1992
Article 2996 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wupost!uunet!mcsun!uknet!warwick!nott-cs!ucl-cs!news
>From: G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Gordon Joly)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Impossibility of flight vs impossibility of AI
Message-ID: <2270@ucl-cs.uucp>
Date: 22 Jan 92 15:11:19 GMT
Sender: news@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Lines: 28

daryl@oracorp.com writes:
 > Chris Malcolm writes (in response to Matthew Wiener):
 > 
 > >>This analogy is bogus: it was known in 1890 that heavier-than-air
 > >>flight was empirically possible.
 > 
 > >1890?? Birds and bees are heavier than air, fly, and people have known
 > >that for longer than they've been people.
 > 
 > I was trying to make an analogy between artificial intelligence and
 > artificial flight. Considering birds and bees as evidence for the
 > possibility of an artificial flying machine is comparable, in my
 > opinion, to considering humans as evidence of the possibility of an
 > artificial thinking machine.
 > 
 > Daryl McCullough
 > ORA Corp.
 > Ithaca, NY



What about the boomerang?

____

Gordon Joly                                       +44 71 387 7050 ext 3716
Internet: G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk          UUCP: ...!{uunet,ukc}!ucl-cs!G.Joly
Computer Science, University College London, Gower Street, LONDON WC1E 6BT


