> greetings. i see don got to AL. i was wondering what difficulties you
> see with this position, don? electronic ecologies can be downloaded
> and run, and mining engineers (not a truly farsighted group,
> historically) are planing for a relative near term nanotechnology
> based mining methodology.
>
All I meant was that as best as I am aware, the "hard" AI posityion is dead.
The emphasis on artificial neural nets and expert systems (as the one
you mention seems to be) live on and thrive, but thinking machines seem
to be with perpetual motion machines now. Need I cite the long list of books?
>> Sercondly, life crawling out of a test tube is one thing, but
>> "Artificial Life" and "AI" have been being promoted enthusiastically
>> by many for some time. We have tried to point out the difficulties
>> with this position.
>
Also see Jeff's comments on the Santa Fe institute group's "artificial life"
and simulation. Rosen seems to demostrate and Casti reiterates that
complex systems are not simulable. From that perspective, "silicon
life" may be a more appropriate concept. It then can be restricted to
computer simulations without the misleading idea that it somehow mimics
organic life. Once again, some real problems with causality come up
if you ignore this.
Regards, Don Mikulecky