Newsgroups: comp.ai
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!nagle
From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: What would IT TAKE to HAVE a TRUE leader in AI?
Message-ID: <nagleD3z334.2p5@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <3h6pf7$a8i@rs10.tcs.tulane.edu> <3hnu20$ogs@hawk.ee.port.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 04:28:16 GMT
Lines: 21
Sender: nagle@netcom11.netcom.com

sgt@sis.port.ac.uk (Simon Thompson) writes:
>I think that AI. needs a David Hilbert type of figure. Someone who 
>can dictate a programme to the community, a programme that we can all 
>respect and agree with. 

     Hilbert's programme for math is generally considered to have had
a stultifying effect upon the field.  Hilbert's vision was to fill in
the gaps of a field considered nearly complete.  As it turned out,
there were major branches of mathematics yet to be discovered.

     AI is in far too early a state for something like Hilbert's
programme.  Not that this stops people from trying.  Minsky,
Feigenbaum, the connectionists, and most recently Brooks have all tried
to lay out grand plans to be implemented by other researchers.  So far,
no grand plan has been a notable success.

     It's worth remembering occasionally that AI can't even do a good
lizard-level brain yet, let alone a mouse.  Ants, though, I think
we're starting to understand a little.

					John Nagle
