Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!ucbvax!hplabs!hpfcso!daq
From: daq@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Quarnstrom)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Can we build computers that build Computers?
Message-ID: <8840038@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM>
Date: 19 Jun 91 20:45:47 GMT
References: <1991Jun16.214929.26509@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Lines: 57

>Doing smart CAD is not enough! 

>In my original posting I meant "Can we (humans) build Computers which
>in turn build new computer architectures without any human
>intervention at any stage.(period)

Then the answer to your question is NO.  We are nowhere near that.
It would really suprise me a great deal to see anything approaching 
true machine intelligence in my lifetime, and I am only 31.

>>As I have said above, I don't believe that the human component will ever be
>>removed from this system. 

>Here I will disagree, Assume (atleast in a fantasy) we have built such
>a smart-self-reliant-computer (or h-m-c human-made-computer) that will
>only take the  specification of functions/tasks and the evaluation
>standards from it's creator (the human) for CREATING a new computer
>architecture (I call it c-m-c ie. computer-made computer)!

Ok, well this is simpler, and you MIGHT be able to do this without real
intelligence.  Certainly without (crige) sentience.  It is dangerous
to say this kind of thing will never happen.  It may, but it is probably
not too close.

>You can think of all the fantastic
>tools/libraries/databases/algorithms/self evaluation schemes etc..
>that are availabe to this h-m-c. Then I don't see any reason why it
>cannot build a machine (c-m-c) that equals or exceeds the specs. we
>provided to it without any human intervention at all!!

What is your experience in computer design?  I ask because you might
be suprise at how little really gets done by the computer as far
as the creative process of design goes.  Right now I wouls say that it
is little or nothing.

>Now you may argue that what if the specs. we provide are so tight &
>tough that it may not even come close to it. That's where we have to
>ponder and do research, and I am sure such an h-m-c will help us to
>solve these problems and lead us to the point where a h-m-c will be
>completely autonomous and would only require specs/problems from a 
>human not their solutions.!!!

Yeah, but if the specs are so hot that a computer can design based on them,
it is little more that a really good CAD system and the 'magic' or
creativity is in the spec.  The machine you describe probably would not
be the new 'intelligent life form' you describe.



>-- a Dreamer.

At the very least.

In my opinion, we are likely to see effective computer interfaces to the
human nervous system long before we create a new intelligence.

doug