Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

freudling · Dec 25, 2010, 04:17 AM

You've all wondered at some point, what happened to the promise of smart computers? Of artificial intelligence? Computers are as dumb as ever. There's been some improvements, but everything on a computer, for the most part, requires incredibly tedious work by the operator.

Computers are pretty much slugs. The iPad is a good change, but it's still pretty dumb, too. What about waking up and having our computers telling us things, and anticipating what we want. "You might be interested in these events today." "This new device was launched today..."

Are we chasing the wrong model: us? Like IBM's Blue Brain Project, neural networks, etc.... or is technology simply too fragmented and primitive at this point for AI to truly work?

Should we still model AI on ourselves is what I'm asking I guess.

CharlesS · Dec 25, 2010, 04:29 AM

Originally Posted by freudling

Computers are pretty much slugs. The iPad is a good change, but it's still pretty dumb, too. What about waking up and having our computers telling us things, and anticipating what we want. "You might be interested in these events today." "This new device was launched today..."

brassplayersrock² · Dec 25, 2010, 04:46 AM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

freudling · Dec 25, 2010, 05:31 AM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Ha, funny, and a classic example of the problem.

lpkmckenna · Dec 25, 2010, 05:52 AM

I have no desire for AI on my home computer. As for "you might be interested in these events today," Google does that pretty well already, without AI.

reader50 · Dec 25, 2010, 06:46 AM

It's a shame AI is moving forwards so slowly. If we just make a critical breakthrough, things could get rolling.

turtle777 · Dec 25, 2010, 11:18 AM

Pfff, we should focus giving those morons in DC some artificial intelligence.

Look at how those brain-dead greedy bastards ruined our country.

-t

SpaceMonkey · Dec 25, 2010, 01:26 PM

"Lower the federal reserve rate, HAL!"

"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."

Spheric Harlot · Dec 25, 2010, 02:52 PM

Insert joke about Sarah Palin and Tea Party voters here.

freudling · Dec 25, 2010, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Pfff, we should focus giving those morons in DC some artificial intelligence.

Look at how those brain-dead greedy bastards ruined our country.

-t

America is pretty messed up right now...

PB2K · Dec 25, 2010, 07:08 PM

Computers are like cars..120 years ago

you needed to be a mechanic to drive one, they broke down too often and had a weird interface (the steering wheel and carbs for example are a late invention)

The computers nowadays ask way too much questions to a person who just want to get some work done, many questions are too difficult to understand for a regular computer user. do you want to configure this and that? Your IPaddress is wrong ! you are deleting a document you have been working on for 6 hours without saving, save or not? A great anticipating computer would work without too much hassle.

Big Mac · 10:06 PM

Providing greater ease of use is a different goal than bringing artificial intelligence to devices. PB2K, what you're discussing is mostly ease of use issues. The iOS has greater ease of use than desktop OSs, mostly because of the simplified application management model, nearly no file management and applications that save their states when exited. It's also much less flexible/more limited, but that's fine for a limited computing device intended for light tasks. That kind of OS model serves a purpose, but it's not the future of all personal computing because it's simply too limited. This is a platform that doesn't even stand on its own yet, requiring a "real" personal computer to manage the devices.

Mac OS X has greater ease of use than Windows 7, although at the superficial level the gap appears to be very small and Windows excels by offering a much larger software base. While it has a couple of superficial UI benefits over OS X, Windows also has many other, more important UI drawbacks; delve slightly below the surface and you'll find that Windows is a rather primitive OS architecturally - and that definitely hurts usability for those who need to administer their systems.

On the other hand, one has to give credit to Microsoft and its partners for getting Windows to run on nearly any hardware. It would have been interesting if Apple had been smarter back in the 80s and had opened up the Mac OS to licensing like Gates originally proposed they do. I think the personal computing world would have been much better off if Mac OS and later OS X had captured the PC market, but then again perhaps it's best the way things are in this reality. I'd much prefer to run OS X over Windows, but I don't want to hack it on to my PC and I want the software availability that Windows provides (although there are many pieces of software on OS X that don't have comparable Windows alternatives.)

BadKosh · Dec 26, 2010, 12:03 AM

Microsofts biggest problem is their management structure. I work at a Gov't agency that has many problems with Entourage. After many bigwigs started having data loss a senior administrator sent a top VP at MS a letter of complaint. They were not even aware their application sucked so much. They sent a few 'application designers' to our location, and when talking to them I asked why they still used a single database instead of single files to store mail/attachments. They claimed the overhead in all those file open/closes was the reason. This hasn't been a problem for about 10 years with desktop computer systems. We are finally starting to use Apple Mail.

Big Mac · 02:32 AM

I agree that can be annoying, but Entourage isn't the only mail app to store mail in single file databases. But I'm more bothered by the archaic Windows architecture that most people don't look at behind the scenes. Specifically, one of the design principles of the Mac OS that Apple has always followed and continued to abide by with Mac OS X is that the system software's file structure should be relatively clean and organized behind the scenes. OS X has a very clean, regimented Library structure where system files reside, and the files are almost always named cleanly and descriptively so that the user can tell what they do. Look at /Library or even /System/Library and you'll see what I mean. Ordered folders for various software components and clearly named files within them.

Contrast Mac OS X's system file architecture with Windows 7's and you'll see just how poorly Windows is designed from this perspective. I suppose a significant reason is due to the fact that Microsoft has tried very hard to maintain backward compatibility with old software, but Windows 7's system file architecture is just about as ugly and arcane as it has always been. I tried looking for where Windows 7 stores its control panels and found out that they are still named with very cryptic short names and simply strewn about in completely disorganized fashion in System32 and other places. It's just a mess, a complete mess of cryptic folders and files with next to no organization. In previous versions of Windows Microsoft has tried to hide the problem by keeping system folders hidden by default, which is no solution to the problem. Every time I think about I get disgusted with Windows again, although not enough to make me want to buy a Mac Pro just to get a tower case from Apple. (I would love to Hackintosh my setup but I also don't want to give up my new 5850 dual Crossfire setup, and unfortunately the Hackintosh community hasn't had great success with AMD - even less when there are two or more cards installed.)

And then couple that complaint with the fact that I have yet to find software that can reliably clone a Windows 7 drive, even when booted from a special utility disk designed for that purpose. I have a thread about it on the Alt. OS forum. The best paid software I could find couldn't do it, whereas I can use Disk Utility to clone an active boot disk and have the clone come out with no problems.

finboy · Dec 27, 2010, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

And then couple that complaint with the fact that I have yet to find software that can reliably clone a Windows 7 drive, even when booted from a special utility disk designed for that purpose. I have a thread about it on the Alt. OS forum. The best paid software I could find couldn't do it, whereas I can use Disk Utility to clone an active boot disk and have the clone come out with no problems.

Win7? How 'bout a flawless, reliable clone of XP SP3? I'd settle for THAT first.

Spheric Harlot · Dec 27, 2010, 11:51 AM

Winclone has worked fine for SP2 for me.

KeyLimePi · Dec 30, 2010, 10:15 AM

If the OP didn't already know it, good cover article in WIRED this month.

Wiskedjak · Dec 30, 2010, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by freudling

Artificial Intelligence: Are we Chasing the Wrong Model?

Do you think we should even be pursuing artificial intelligence at all?

Sealobo · Dec 30, 2010, 11:00 AM

AI = mechanical thinking = stupid

we already have mechanical automation for work, and computer for serious calculation.

AI is bullshit. just leave the creativity for human.

SpaceMonkey · Jan 1, 2011, 03:05 AM

Look, I just want hot fembots and a holodeck.

The Final Dakar · Jan 1, 2011, 03:10 AM

11011001 · Jan 1, 2011, 07:24 PM

Traditional AI attempted to model intelligence with mathematics and various logics. There is a growing realization among researchers that perhaps this is the wrong approach. Instead of building systems that always give us the best answer, perhaps it's better to build systems that give us a good answer, or maybe even sometimes a wrong answer. Decentralization, and emergence probably hold the key to creating a reasonably sophisticated AI.

The memresistor guys are convinced they'll create the first AIs. They think that by embedding memory, along with processing elements, they have a scalable, decentralized, and parallel approach to building AI, one that analogs the synapse. Their confidence is a little too hard to swallow, but if you can read past it, this article is interesting:
MoNETA: A Mind Made from Memristors - IEEE Spectrum