Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ub!acsu.buffalo.edu
From: pmm@acsu.buffalo.edu (patrick m mullhaupt)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: What AI is exactly.
Message-ID: <36424@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 17 Sep 90 04:15:27 GMT
References: <25392@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <3797@se-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM> <3543@gara.une.oz.au>
Sender: news@acsu.Buffalo.EDU
Organization: SUNY Buffalo
Lines: 72
Nntp-Posting-Host: autarch.acsu.buffalo.edu

>a) The system MUST be able to learn.
>b)	The system MUST be autonomous.
>c)	The system MUST be able to reason.
>d)	The system MUST be self aware.
>It is clear to see that a human easily satisfies these requirements and so is
>an intelligent system. A cat also satisfies these requirements. So we now have
>a common basis for known intelligent behaviour. An intelligent machine would
>need to satisfy these requirements to be classed as an intelligent system.
>
>		With Regards,
>
>				Philip Nettleton,
>				AUSTRALIA.






	I don't have any problems with these constraints.  I do have a
question though.

	Would a group of individuals, say the congress of the USA,
qualify as an "intelligent system"? :-)  More generally, do you allow
collective intelligences?  I would guess that you might not, but your
definition seems to allow it.

	G'day,
		Patrick Mullhaupt

Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: world
Organization: SUNY Buffalo
Keywords: 

Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: What AI is exactly.
Summary: 
Expires: 
References: <25392@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <3797@se-sd.SanDiego.NCR.COM> <3543@gara.une.oz.au>
Sender: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: SUNY Buffalo
Keywords: 

>a) The system MUST be able to learn.
>b)	The system MUST be autonomous.
>c)	The system MUST be able to reason.
>d)	The system MUST be self aware.
>It is clear to see that a human easily satisfies these requirements and so is
>an intelligent system. A cat also satisfies these requirements. So we now have
>a common basis for known intelligent behaviour. An intelligent machine would
>need to satisfy these requirements to be classed as an intelligent system.
>
>		With Regards,
>
>				Philip Nettleton,
>				AUSTRALIA.

	I don't have any problems with these constraints.  I do have a
question though.

	Would a group of individuals, say the congress of the USA,
qualify as an "intelligent system"? :-)  More generally, do you allow
collective intelligences?  I would guess that you might not, but your
definition seems to allow it.

	G'day,
		Patrick Mullhaupt