If you're talking about human-level intelligence, I think you're on to something. Old-fashioned AI was probably closer to the right track than we are now. > d

If you're talking about human-level intelligence, I think you're on to something. Old-fashioned AI was probably closer to the right track than we are now. > did attempts to generalize some of that research fail because the approach was fundamentally flawed, or was it because such efforts themselves weren't as good as initial projects? In many cases there haven't _been_ attempts to follow up on that early work. It's more like the zeitgeist just shifted to other things. For example, SHRDLU was just a couple years before the first AI winter, and when spring came (~1980) people had largely moved on. (Which isn't to say there weren't also flaws with the approach.)