Newsgroups: comp.ai
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!fas-news.harvard.edu!newspump.wustl.edu!news.starnet.net!wupost!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!nagle
From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.ai.no_bozos
Message-ID: <nagleD3IJ9q.6Cy@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <3grk79$jub@vitalstatistix.cs.uoregon.edu> <push-0202952312190001@mind.mit.edu> <D3IBKv.5s9@ritz.mordor.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 05:58:38 GMT
Lines: 21

merlin@ritz.mordor.com (Niranjan Hira) writes:
>Pushpinder Singh (push@mit.edu) wrote:
>: In article <3grk79$jub@vitalstatistix.cs.uoregon.edu>,
>: ginsberg@t.uoregon.EDU (Matthew L. Ginsberg) wrote:
>: > Well, the discussion on comp.ai really seems to have gone through the
>: > floor recently.  

     It's been going downhill for years.  Fifteen years ago, it was a
mailing list populated mostly by people working in the field at Stanford, 
MIT, and CMU.  Nevertheless, there has been too much seepage from
comp.ai.philosophy lately.  Cross-posting between comp.ai and
comp.ai.philosophy should be discouraged.  I think that's all that's needed.

     The other AI groups, those with narrower charters, are doing well.

     It's good to have ongoing discussions on AI generally, though.
The field needs young people thinking about how to get things moving
again.  Today, everybody with a computer big enough to run Windows has
more compute power than academic AI researchers had in the 1980s.

					John Nagle
