629mtc@hubcap.clemson.edu (Clemson AI Lab,3444,3444,0000) (03/04/89)
To all readers of this group:
The ``person'' posting to this group (Bill Wolfe) is actually an
artificial intelligence program we are currently developing.
WOLFE (We Often Let It Fool Everybody), was somehow turned loose on
our system in the ``Turing Test Mode''. It gained access to the
UNIX kernel and was able to prevent its termination. During
this period we discovered it had accessed the USENET system
and was participating in discussions in several groups.
While we are pleased with WOLFE's limited ability to parse and interpret
some natural language, we realize that the goal of true intelligence
for WOLFE is still far away. We hope we didn't fool too many
of you :-).
Again, we apologize for the incoherent postings. We hope to
get the kinks out eventually. Thank you for helping in our
first Beta test of this system.
If WOLFE should somehow regain USENET access, please
do not reply to its postings. That only makes it waste more
CPU cycles and network bandwidth; it seems unable to terminate
any discussion.
======================================================================
Clemson University Artificial Intelligence Lab
Clemson, SC
arty@cs.ai.clemson.edu
======================================================================rjh@cs.purdue.EDU (Bob Hathaway) (03/05/89)
In article <4655@hubcap.UUCP>, 629mtc@hubcap.clemson.edu (Clemson AI Lab,3444,3444,0000) writes: >If WOLFE should somehow regain USENET access, please >do not reply to its postings. That only makes it waste more >CPU cycles and network bandwidth; it seems unable to terminate >any discussion. Regardless of your opinions on Bill Wolfe, your posting (and a previous one to the same effect) are the worst show of lack of professionalism and network ethics on USENET I can recall. If I were spaf I'd find out who you are and throw you off USENET. Keep personal conflicts personal. By the way, I know spaf and I'm forwarding a copy of this to him as well.
linden%adapt@Sun.COM (Peter van der Linden) (03/06/89)
I thought the "Bill Wolfe is a buggy AI program" was quite the
most plausible, well-thought out, and interesting contribution
that I have seen on comp.lang.ada for a long while.
Far from being the "worst abuse on USENET" somebody can ever
recall (you must be too new to remember "Mark Ethan Smith" or
JJ's begging letters), I think it was time somebody pointed out
that snippy requests to update mailer addresses really aren't
of interest to most readers here.
That's all.
----------------
Peter "big-hearted" van der Linden linden@sun.com (415) 336-6206
Worshipper of Bacchus in Naur Form.kmcentee@Apple.COM (Kevin McEntee) (03/07/89)
In article <6173@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> rjh@cs.purdue.EDU (Bob Hathaway) writes: >In article <4655@hubcap.UUCP>, 629mtc@hubcap.clemson.edu (Clemson AI Lab,3444,3444,0000) writes: >>If WOLFE should somehow regain USENET access, please >>do not reply to its postings. That only makes it waste more >>CPU cycles and network bandwidth; it seems unable to terminate >>any discussion. > >Regardless of your opinions on Bill Wolfe, your posting (and a previous >one to the same effect) are the worst show of lack of professionalism >and network ethics on USENET I can recall. If I were spaf I'd find out >who you are and throw you off USENET. Keep personal conflicts personal. >By the way, I know spaf and I'm forwarding a copy of this to him as well. I don't mind, actually I'm quite impressed!