> It is refreshing to find a "computer person" who suspects that us
>"brain people" might be on to something!
>>Paul C. Knox.
Hey, I think that's a bit unfair. I think it is pretty safe to say
that the last ten years - or so - have shown a significant increase
of attention to neural processes - not necessarily limited to
artificial neural networks. With Minsky and Papert torpedoing
connectionist work of the late sixties, AI was giving a bum steer into
thinking that symbolic processing was simply the only way to approach
intelligence.
Clearly, some computer scienctists never gave up on brain modeling
and have long been respected for their efforts to further both our
understanding of biological intelligence - or at least, biological
functioning - and how that might aid folks attempting to create an
artificial intelligence; von der Malsburg, Sejnowski, and Hinton come
to mind to name a few.
Don't get me wrong. I agree that "computer people" have long neglected
the only working model of intelligence we have and therefore have tons
of catching up to do, but we're working on it at least...
- Joe
email: jdevlin at pollux.usc.edu
