Xref: utzoo comp.society.futures:401 comp.ai:1505
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcvax!ukc!its63b!gvw
From: gvw@its63b.ed.ac.uk (G Wilson)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures,comp.ai
Subject: Re: The future of AI [was Re: Time Magazine -- Computers of the Future]
Message-ID: <1134@its63b.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 3 Apr 88 08:51:59 GMT
References: <8803270154.AA08607@bu-cs.bu.edu> <962@daisy.UUCP> <4640@bcsaic.UUCP>
Reply-To: gvw@its63b.ed.ac.uk (G Wilson)
Organization: Edinburgh Concurrent Supercomputer Project
Lines: 31
Keywords: AI philosophy

In article <4640@bcsaic.UUCP> rwojcik@bcsaic.UUCP (Rick Wojcik) writes:
>         Moreover, your opinion that conventional techniques can
>replace AI is ludicrous.  Consider the area of natural language.  What
>conventional techniques that you know of can extract information from
>natural language text or translate a passage from English to French?

Errmmm...show me *any* program which can do these things?  To date,
AI has been successful in these areas only when used in toy domains.

>The future of AI is going to be full of unrealistic hype and disappointing
>failures. 

Just like its past, and present.  Does anyone think AI would be as prominent
as it is today without (a) the unrealistic expectations of Star Wars,
and (b) America's initial nervousness about the Japanese Fifth Generation
project?

>           But the demand for AI is so great that we have no choice but to
>push on.

Manifest destiny??  A century ago, one could have justified
continued research in phrenology by its popularity.  Judge science
by its results, not its fashionability.

I think AI can be summed up by Terry Winograd's defection.  His
SHRDLU program is still quoted in *every* AI textbook (at least all
the ones I've seen), but he is no longer a believer in the AI
research programme (see "Understanding Computers and Cognition",
by Winograd and Flores). 

Greg Wilson