Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!uwvax!uwslh!lishka
From: lishka@uwslh.UUCP (Christopher Lishka)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: The Success of AI
Message-ID: <279@uwslh.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 21-Oct-87 18:14:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: uwslh.279
Posted: Wed Oct 21 18:14:20 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Oct-87 07:47:41 EDT
References: <193@PT.CS.CMU.EDU> <224@bernina.UUCP>
Reply-To: lishka@uwslh.UUCP (Christopher Lishka)
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison, State Hygiene Lab
Lines: 53

In article <224@bernina.UUCP> srp@bernina.UUCP (Scott Presnell) writes:
>In article <193@PT.CS.CMU.EDU> spe@spice.cs.cmu.edu (Sean Engelson) writes:
>
>>
>>Given a sufficiently powerful computer, I could, in theory, simulate
>>the human body and brain to any desired degree of accuracy.  This
>
>Horse shit.  The problem is you don't even know exactly what you are
>simulating!

Good point (although I may not have phrased it so strongly)!  I would
like to see some sort of proof that one could, "in theory", simulate
the human body and brain to any desired degree of accuracy.  Hell, as
a student of A.I. who is taking a Neurobiology course, it seems to me
humans know very little about the workings of the brain, let alone
other areas of biology where there are many unanswered questions about
how things work or why certain processes go on.  How can one simulate
something that is not fully (or even largely) understood?  Especially
something as unpredictable and incredibly complex as the human body?
I would like to see a proof...

>Let's get down to a specific case:
>I propose that given any amount of computing power, you could not presently,
>and probably will never be able to simulate me: Scott R. Presnell.
>My wife can be the judge.  

Good test!  However, to be fair, Mr. Engleson seemed to indicate that
"a" human body (read: NOT a specific human body or person), not Mr.
Presnell's body.  But I agree with Mr. Presnell; my beloved would
notice a difference too (at least I would hope ;-).

>This may sound reactionary, that's because that's the way I responded
>internally to this first statement.  I apologize if I've jumped into a
>discussion too quickly, I don't have time to read the previous discussions
>right now.  

I was going to write a flame immediately when I saw Mr. Engleson's
statement, but I thought I should wait.  If Mr. Presnell's followup is
out of line, than it is just as out of line as Mr. Engleson's statement.

Disclaimer: the above my thoughts and no one else's, except (maybe)
those of my cockatiels!

>Scott Presnell						Organic Chemistry
>Swiss Federal Institute of Technology  (ETH-Zentrum)
>CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland.
>uucp:seismo!mcvax!cernvax!ethz!srp (srp@ethz.uucp); bitnet:Benner@CZHETH5A


-- 
Chris Lishka                    /lishka@uwslh.uucp
Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene <-lishka%uwslh.uucp@rsch.wisc.edu
"What, me, serious? Get real!"  \{seismo, harvard,topaz,...}!uwvax!uwslh!lishka