DRogers%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA (07/18/84)
From: David Rogers <DRogers%MIT-OZ@MIT-MC.ARPA>
Can you spot the fallacy in this implicit definition of intelligence?
"As the programs become more refined and the network of paths and
boxes grow more complex, it becomes increasingly difficult to predict
what a computer will decide. In one second, it can process between 10
and 100 thousand logical inferences, or syllogisms. In 1981, the Japanese
government announced that it would provide almost a half a billion dollars
in seed money over the next decade to produce machines that will be able
to draw as many as 1 billion logical inferences per second.
If that goal is achieved, a computer could make, in one second, a decision
so complex that it would take a human 30 years to unravel it, assuming that
he or she could think constantly at the superhuman speed of 1 syllogism
per second. Given 10 seconds to ponder a problem, a computer's decision
would have to be taken on faith. By human standards it would be unfathomable.
When computers can have thoughts that would take more than a human lifetime
to understand, it is tempting to consider them smarter than their makers."
>From "The Lure of Artificial Intelligence", by George Johnson, in the
APF reporter, Vol 7, No. 3.
(In a box at the bottom of the page, one reads "George Johnson, a freelance
writer, is reporting on the quest to build computers smarter than humans.")dimare@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA (07/19/84)
From: Adolfo Di-Mare <dimare@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA>
The following is an even more intelligent program than the one described
in the Lure of AI. Any human being trying to figure it out will die blue
even for small values of n:
n + 1 m = 0
/
AI(m,n) = < AI(m-1,1) n = 0
\
AI(m-1,AI(m,n-1)) otherwise
Adolfo
///
P.S.I The A in the above definition stands for Artificial. The I stands
for Intelligence (it's easy when you know it).
P.S.II I couldn't come up with the Prolog version, which is far more
intelligent.PEREIRA@SRI-AI.ARPA (07/20/84)
This message is empty.