On Sat, 20 Feb 1999 03:01:24 GMT, Bloxy's at hotmail.com (Bloxy's) wrote:
>In article <36cd9595.1501951 at news-server>, ZZZghull at stny.lrun.com (Jerry Hull) wrote:
>>On Fri, 19 Feb 1999 11:24:09 -0500, Michael Edelman <mje at mich.com> wrote:
>>>>>The notion that intelligence is merely behavior is an old one, and one
>>>that's had 80+ years to come up with a good model of human intelligence.
>>>While the behaviorist model has been very successful at modeling
>>>conditioned response to stimuli, it has been an abysmal failure at
>>>modeling or explaining things like language as behavior.
>>>>An alternative is to designate the cleverness of computers et al. "machine
>>intelligence" as opposed to "conscious intelligence".
>>And all you have is still a cunning trick,
>trying to disguise a lie into the truth.
>There is no such a thing as machine intelligence.
>It is utter absurd.
There still is that cunning trick. Image processing programs DO process
images; database programs DO process data; at SOME level, Big Blue DOES play
chase, & a very fine game indeed (sorry, Gary).
Better give a name to what machines can do, than pretend they can do nothing.
"However far you may travel in this world, you will still occupy
the same volume of space". Traditional Ur-Bororo saying.