Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!amdahl!kp
From: kp@uts.amdahl.com (Ken Presting)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Simulating thinking is NOT like simulating flying
Summary: Speed of processing is one scale of intelligence
Keywords: Strong AI, Weak AI, methodology, simulating thought
Message-ID: <32pG02L987gr01@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
Date: 9 Feb 90 18:32:16 GMT
References: <13212@cs.yale.edu> <74@cogsci.ucsd.EDU> <1990Feb7.174646.245@pcsbst.pcs.com> <1990Feb8.213856.20116@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu>
Reply-To: kp@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (Ken Presting)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 20

In article <1990Feb8.213856.20116@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu> hougen@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu (Dean Hougen) writes:
>In article <1990Feb7.174646.245@pcsbst.pcs.com> roland@cochise.pcs.com (Roland Rambau) writes:
>> . . .  so we do not call
>>simulations intelligent if they are orders of magnitude slow.
>>( Its not a coincidence that most intelligence tests are to be
>>performed under strong time constraints :-)
>
>My thought exp:
>	Put a man on a space ship traveling near the speed of light.
>	During his round trip from Earth out and back, he comes up with
>the theory of relativity.
>	In our time (here on Earth) his trip takes several million years.
>	To the man on the ship, only say 50 years have passed.
>	You have just said that he was thinking too slow, and is therefor
>unintelligent.  Imagine that, great thoughts, but just too slow to be 
>thinking.

Perhaps both of you would agree that speed of processing is *one*
relevant measure of intelligence.  I don't see any need to set a specific
threshold in this case.  Slow thinking is less useful than quick thinking.