|
[DPRG] SRS thread
Subject: [DPRG] SRS thread
From: dpa
dpa at io.isem.smu.edu
Date: Mon Apr 30 13:30:55 CDT 2007
Howdy,
William Harold Newman and R. Steven Rainwater comments on the
SRS thread post focus on the author's contention and calculations
of the complexity of the brain and the possibility of understanding
and modeling the same.
As Steve notes, that's almost a matter of faith, one way or the
other (Steve sez... "It probably just boils down to some people
being optimists and some being pessimists. :) And we've had that
discussion on this list and elsewhere many times. But that is not
what struck me as interesting about the original post.
What caught my attention in the post was not that old chestnut,
but rather the author's observations about practical robotics.
Not what may or may not be possible down the road in some magical
place where robots can "think", but rather what is possible for
us robot builders in the here-and-now.
So I'll excerpt a couple of his thoughts here for further contemplation.
Start with the first paragraph:
"AI is a wonderful study. It has the grand goal of making philosophy an
empirical science. Long may it wave. However, it has not been
particularly useful in designing robots."
I agree.
Discuss.
And then the last paragraph:
"I believe the design model for the robot is not a synthetic human
with independent thinking, but a sheep dog that acts as an agent
for the shepherd. The sheep dog has autonomy (like a thermostat)
without independence."
Those familiar with my own vapid ramblings will recognize the same
model. I usually say to think of robots not as "replacement humans"
but rather as "intelligent tools." But it is the same basic concept.
best,
dpa
More information about the DPRG mailing list
|
