Title: | The Digital way of working |
Moderator: | QUARK::LIONEL ON |
Created: | Fri Feb 14 1986 |
Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Number of topics: | 5321 |
Total number of notes: | 139771 |
The following is extracted from SCIENCE magazine, the 31 July issue: "For software developers, the most important results of this research [into artificial intelligence] may not be the AI programs at all, but the AI programming style. "...Texas Instruments' W. Joe Watson made a very disconcerting statement: 'Most of us think that AI per se will lose its identity within about 5 years.' "Watson did not mean by this that the recent surge of interest in commercial AI applications is beginning to wane; if anything the AI industry is maturing and becoming better established. "...Watson told SCIENCE he meant that AI programming techniques are rapidly merging into the mainstream of computer science. "Watson is hardly alone in his assessment. SCIENCE heard variations on the same theme from a number of companies at the [AAAI] conference: from a software developer's point of view, the most important single idea coming out of AI research is not a program per se, but a new approach to programming in general." Suspicions confirmed! For years I've been bothered by AI: with the exception of very few programs (the VAX configuration program and SPEAR, to name a couple), most of the crap people have touted as being artificially intelligent were traditional programs with windows, graphics, and objects. Separating the method/tool from the results makes sense to me. There are a lot of things about AI methods I liked, such as rapid prototyping, but I was always turned off by the snake-oil salesman approach. I favor weeding out those programs that claim to be "artificially intelligent" or "expert systems" merely because they were written in LISP or some object-oriented language.
T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
356.1 | What Goes Around Comes Around... | HBO::PENNEY | One Cent + another Cent = a Nickel | Wed Aug 05 1987 09:20 | 32 |
Pete, it's always been like that. Each new approach has always been the answer. Consider the following: PL/1: (Programing Language One)--It married COBOL & FORTRAN, and was supposed to be the best of both. How many PL/1 programmers are there out there (that admit to it--other than moi?? ;-) ) EDP: Electronic Data Processing (vs. unit record, ie punch card equipment). OA: Office Automation, the cure for office efficiency, or lack thereof. Hs it? DSS: Decision Support Systems. This was the "AI" of a decade ago. Seems to me I recall a company that produced a general ledger package claim it was a DSS. Yet, DSS are man/machine systems: The machine supports the human in judgement call situations. I think it's stretching it a little to classify a general ledger package as a DSS. Carried to its ultimate, I suppose AI would take the man (generic; women included ;-) ) out of the equation, and make it all machine. Doubt that's possible in its ultimate form, given today's technology. Plenty of science fiction around about future scenarios, though. Some of it pretty believable. To me, it relates to "technology push" as opposed to "demand pull"; the snake-oilers out there have something to sell, so they sell it. Whether it meets human needs or not is a different question. Do we focus too much on technology as a replacement for humanity? Or, as a cure-all for our(USA!) productivity declines in the world market? And, do the snake-oilers latch on to that as a selling strategy? I wonder... |