tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29117034.post4254828083498423446..comments2024-01-08T12:39:20.176+01:00Comments on Data Mining Research - dataminingblog.com: WIRED point of view on AISandro Saittahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17682082649770875583noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29117034.post-15129993413219235312007-10-31T22:22:00.000+01:002007-10-31T22:22:00.000+01:00A.I. has clearly not produced working systems whic...A.I. has clearly not produced working systems which would satisfy the most optimistic and heady expectations of the 1950s. Kurzweil and his ilk notwithstanding, I don't think contemporary constructs are much closer to realizing such dreams. <BR/><BR/>At the least, though, one might say that the collective field has amassed a set of negatives: <I>Parallel processing</I> alone will not acheive strong A.I. <I>Symbolic processing</I> alone will not acheive strong A.I. <I>Connectionism</I> alone will not acheive strong A.I. The list goes on and on...<BR/><BR/>How much one cares about this depends on one's aims. Though the possibility of strong A.I. is an interesting question, for my part, I doubt that strong A.I. is even possible. Still, I consider myself a pragmatist. Working, practical technologies which have emerged from under the A.I. umbrella are powerful and have solved difficult real-world problems. If computers are evolving into the ultimate "idiot savants", then so be it. To make a mechanical analogies: automobiles are not thoroughbreds, and robots are not athletes, yet they serve their intended purposes well. I wouldn't take narcissistic disappointments too seriously.Will Dwinnellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379859054257561952noreply@blogger.com