Date: Wed Sep 07 2005 - 18:05:24 MDT
J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
> On 9/7/05 7:12 AM, "Richard Loosemore" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>I was in the middle of my Ph.D. thesis (in AI/Psychology) in 1992 when I
>>finally realised that the systems I wanted to build *could not* be built
>>without incredibly sophisticated tools. I stopped work and switched
>>careers to become a software engineer for a while, with the aim of
>>finding out just what kind of tools would be needed.
> This is a phase most people go through at some point in their AI career, a
> cheap belief that makes it easy to avoid doing hard work.
So that's why I stopped: I was afraid of hard work. Darn.
> How do you know that current tools are terribly inadequate or that
> incredibly sophisticated tools are required if you are incapable of even
> specifying the engineering problem they need to solve?
How to you know I *didn't* specify the engineering problem?
> Now, it may yet turn out that some uber-tool is required that we have not
> thought of, but until you specify the problem you are going to use the tools
> to solve you won't be able to prove it nor make useful progress on
> developing a helpful tool. I am personally doubtful that such a tool is
> missing. If it can't be done with a C compiler (not that you necessarily
> would want to), it can't be done at all. Most of what is missing in the
> software world is nice integration and the implementation convenience of "do
> what I mean, not what I say", which largely amounts to a sugary frosting
> layer on the computer science cake.
Prior to starting that AI Ph.D. I had worked long and hard on Inmos
Transputers (do you know what they were? massively parallel hardware with
a novel parallel programming language integrated in the chip design), so my
comments about the difficulty level were based on real world experience of
massively parallel systems.
This message was sent using Endymion MailMan.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 18 2013 - 04:00:47 MDT