At 11:23 +1030 22/2/16, Glen Turner wrote:
>The essential argument was between artificial intelligence (John
>McCarthy, Marvin Minsky, Herbert A Simon, based around MIT, CMU and
>Stanford SAIL) and computer augmentation of human thought (Vannevar
>Bush, Douglas Engelbart, based around Stanford's SRI and, later, Xerox
>PARC). There was some bad blood between the two groups; bear that in
>mind if you read historical documents.
>
>Good Old Fashioned AI is now widely seen as having limited success. The
>predictions of practitioners of the time now look a little fantastical.
>Many of the algorithms of the era are today learned and used without
>the related claims of 'intelligence'.
>
>Augmentation of human thought was a dramatic success. The smartphone is
>pretty much an implementation of Bush and Engelbart's wildest dreams.

All very nicely put.  (What else would I expect??).

I recently repeated my nasty comments about Simon, Minsky & co. (this time in 
the context of drones), and tried yet again with the 'complementary 
intelligence' meme:
http://www.rogerclarke.com/SOS/Drones-I.html#CSD

>In reaction against the reductionism of decision systems, decision support 
>systems emerged. These effectively adopt the position that what human 
>decision-makers need is not artificial, humanlike intelligence (which is 
>already available in great quantity), but rather an alternative form of 
>intelligence that humans exhibit far less, and that can be usefully referred 
>to as 'complementary intelligence' (Clarke 1989): "Surely man and machine are 
>natural complements: They assist one another" (Wyndham 1932). Together, the 
>collaborative whole would be, in the words of Bolter (1986, p. 238) 'synthetic 
>intelligence'.
>
>To function as a decision support system, however, software must produce 
>information useful to human decision-makers (such as analyses of the apparent 
>sensitivity of output variables to input variables). Alternatively, a decision 
>support system might offer recommended actions, together with explanations of 
>the rationale underlying the recommendations. But is this feasible?


-- 
Roger Clarke                                 http://www.rogerclarke.com/
                                    
Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd      78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61 2 6288 6916                        http://about.me/roger.clarke
mailto:[email protected]                http://www.xamax.com.au/

Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Law            University of N.S.W.
Visiting Professor in Computer Science    Australian National University
_______________________________________________
Link mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Reply via email to