Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!media-lab!minsky
From: minsky@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Marvin Minsky)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: What Has Traditional AI Accomplished?
Message-ID: <3694@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>
Date: 12 Oct 90 20:33:03 GMT
References: <69367@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <1990Oct9.184502.106@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <1712@oravax.UUCP> <1990Oct12.192833.7783@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Reply-To: minsky@media-lab.media.mit.edu (Marvin Minsky)
Organization: MIT Media Lab, Cambridge MA
Lines: 12

In article <1990Oct12.192833.7783@watdragon.waterloo.edu> cpshelley@violet.uwaterloo.ca (cameron shelley) writes:
> ...  All forms of machine language
>'use' are not very well funded but I don't think generation has really
>begun replacing translation, so much as complementing it.  Translation
>has been focusing more on the harder task of  dealing with real texts in 
>identifiable genres, while generation could be used as you describe, I
>just don't know of any examples.  Perhaps it is different in the 'real
>world'.

I don't have any hard facts, but have the impression that translation
is well funded in Japan, and in Europe, where many not-perfect systems
are in large scale use for rough translation, usually followed up by
human corrections.  I am told that this is very cost effective.