Newsgroups: comp.ai
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!cbnewsj!jwi
From: jwi@cbnewsj.att.com (Jim Winer @ AT&T, Middletown, NJ)
Subject: Re: What Has Traditional AI Accomplished?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 90 13:56:31 GMT
Message-ID: <1990Oct16.135631.6444@cbnewsj.att.com>
Summary: Neural nets in 1959
References: <69609@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <1990Oct15.143325.26044@unislc.uucp>
Lines: 31

Someone (not attributed when received) writes:

| ||I think your problem is in recognizing the fruits of research done 10
| ||to 20 years ago in "everyday" applications.

| Loren Petrich writes:
| 
| | 	That's part of it.

| | 	And Neural Nets, what I am working on now, are a field that is
| | only recently reviving.

Keith L. Breinholt writes:

| Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I though Neural Nets as an area of
| study was only 5 or so years old.  In terms of research, 5 years is
| baby technology.  If Neural Nets are consistent with other research it
| won't make it into general public acceptance for another 5 to 10
| years.

I worked on the Mark I Perceptron (Rosenblatt model) in 1959 
at Cornel Aeronautical Laboratories, Inc. (defunct) under contract
to Office of Naval Research (ONR). That makes the field at least
30 years old. Neural Nets have been inconvenient to work with until 
recently when specialized hardware has become available.

Jim Winer -- jwi@mtfme.att.com -- Opinions not represent employer.
------------------------------------------------------------------
"No, no: the purpose of language is to cast spells on other people ..."
								Lisa S Chabot