Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai,comp.robotics
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!utnut!utgpu!pindor
From: pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor)
Subject: Re: Minsky's new article
Message-ID: <Cz9uyr.FC0@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca>
Organization: UTCC Public Access
References: <39d8g2$dlm@coli-gate.coli.uni-sb.de> <gyroCysG7u.8Hs@netcom.com> <1994Nov7.010450.26534@news.media.mit.edu> <39vo5u$3fv@trog.dra.hmg.gb>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 19:18:27 GMT
Lines: 29
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai.philosophy:22037 comp.ai:25217 comp.robotics:15342

In article <39vo5u$3fv@trog.dra.hmg.gb>,
Walter Gray <wagray@taz.dra.hmg.gb> wrote:
........
>Us outsiders (if I may be inclusive) tend to view AI as a field that 
>is long on guru-ism but short on product. Previous posters discussed
>predictions like television, space-ships, atom bombs etc, but forgot that
>these were all imminent technologies that came about within a single 
>lifetime after the predictions were made. They were easy wins.
>
You are very selective about your examples. How about Leonardo da Vinci's
helicopter, for instance?

>The AI community has shown no signs of being able to produce a machine 
>with the intelligence of an ant. (Not even a stupid ant). This is why the 
>brain replacement idea sounds silly.
>
>Is this enough amplification for you?
>
See Hans Moravec's discussion concerning the fly's brain.
Whether the brain replacement idea is a sound one is another matter, but
your objections do not hold water.

Andrzej

-- 
Andrzej Pindor                        The foolish reject what they see and 
University of Toronto                 not what they think; the wise reject
Instructional and Research Computing  what they think and not what they see.
pindor@gpu.utcc.utoronto.ca                           Huang Po
