Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!o.gp.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!hm02+ From: hm02+@andrew.cmu.edu (Hans P. Moravec) Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy Subject: Re: AI - the real problem Message-ID: Date: 8 Feb 91 01:54:33 GMT Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 29 schraudo@beowulf.ucsd.edu (Nici Schraudolph) writes: >G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Gordon Joly) writes: >>I see a discontinuity in the development intelligence, at the point of >>the emergence of homo sapiens. ... > One hypothesis is that the "extra intelligence" resides not so much > in the individual human brain, but rather in the countless cognitive > artifacts and social structure we have created for ourselves. (*) > Thus although we still essentially have animal brains, over the > generations we collectively managed to create an environment in > which slightly modified animal brains can pull all sorts of amazing > stunts (such as discussing their own epistemology :-). > > From this point of view, the bottom-up approach to AI will not culminate > in an intelligent machine per se but rather in a population of machines > capable of structuring their environment so as to eventually become > intelligent. Might take a while though... Unlike humans, the robots don't start in an intellectual vacuum. They'll get their initial epistemology, mathematics and do-it-yourself tips from us, almost the instant their minds are capable of absorbing it. Getting to where we are now is (we'll say in hindsight) the trivial part. Things will get interesting when they then begin to push into unexplored mental territory. Hans Moravec