Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai,comp.robotics
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!ceylon!wizard.pn.com!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!uknet!festival!edcogsci!jeff
From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Subject: Re: Minsky's new article
Message-ID: <Czqnw8.4Cn@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Sender: usenet@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (C News Software)
Nntp-Posting-Host: bute-alter.aiai.ed.ac.uk
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
References: <1994Nov7.010450.26534@news.media.mit.edu> <CzFoww.8At@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <jqbCzKEKG.Kxp@netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 1994 21:04:56 GMT
Lines: 52
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai.philosophy:22533 comp.ai:25440 comp.robotics:15614

In article <jqbCzKEKG.Kxp@netcom.com> jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter) writes:
>In article <CzFoww.8At@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>,
>Jeff Dalton <jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>In article <1994Nov7.010450.26534@news.media.mit.edu> minsky@media.mit.edu (Marvin Minsky) writes:
>>>gyro@netcom.com (Scott L. Burson) writes:
>>
>>>> Whether such articles as Marvin's really have negative consequences
>>>> for AI funding I have no idea, but I think it's a valid concern for
>>>> Sean to be raising.  > >-- Scott Burson
>>>
>>>Really, now?  I missed this on the first pass.  We have a name for
>>>when a person proposes not to discuss an important subject because it
>>>could lead to financial loss. It is called conflict of interest, and
>>>in intellectual affairs is considered unethical.
>>
>>What is this supposed to mean?  That if Sean thinks your article will
>>have negative consequences it's unethical for him to say so?
>
>Really, Jeff, you need to work on your reading comprehension. 

Interesting that you say this while getting my article completely
wrong.

> It isn't
>the discussion of negative funding consequences that is unethical,

No kidding.

>   it is
>the suggestion that the article shouldn't be published if doing so has
>negative funding consequences.  

What we actually had is this:

  Ignoring the impression that this article leaves about Minsky's critical
  intelligence (which is a personal problem for him), it can't help AI
  researchers looking for funding if this sort of glaring silliness appears
  in a forum like Scientific American.

Is it supposed to be unethical for someone who thinks this is the case
to say so?

> Just as Freeman Dyson's admission that,
>while Star Wars was bad science, it was a great source of funding of physics
>projects wasn't unethical; it was the submission of the grant requests with
>this knowledge that was unethical.

And Sean's done that, has he?

-- jd


