Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site sdcrdcf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!jkb
From: jkb@sdcrdcf.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Man vs. Machine
Message-ID: <1184@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Jul-84 09:16:45 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdcrdcf.1184
Posted: Fri Jul  6 09:16:45 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Jul-84 23:52:30 EDT
Organization: System Development Corporation, Santa Monica
Lines: 28


     I was watching Showtime the other day and happened to see an
episode of The Paper Chase, the Second Year where the engineering
department pitted their "thinking" computer program against the
law department, and eventually, Professor Kingsfield.  He was soundly
trounced on all of the rote questions involving interpretations of
the law because the computer had a faster access to the law database
and could cite (and use) more references and relevant cases for
substantiation.  When it came down to the final showdown, Kingsfield
posed a hypothetical situation to the computer, which proceeded to
apply more and more of its resources to the problem until it barfed.
     My question is this:  Is there such a thing as a machine that
will, without regard to its own life and limb and programming, consume
itself by applying more resources (i.e., CPU power, memory, etc.)
to solve a particular problem?
     This theme has been shown in quite a few SF movies and shows  
(Forbidden Planet and the Star Trek episode with the Mark V computer,
to name two).  It bothers me a little that whenever we see a version of
Man vs. Computer, man always wins because computer barfs.  
     Does anybody out in net.sf.land know of a situation where this
has not happened; that is, where either computer wins and man barfs, or
where computer gives up (note: I don't consider Wargames in this
category)?

                                          Yours until Nomad comes home,

                                          John Barbee