2 ms·
Huh? Engelbart didn't like AI or at least didn't want his team to have anything to do with it: >I recall seeing an interview with Engelbart that went over his
by hollerith 2y ago
Huh? Engelbart didn't like AI or at least didn't want his team to have anything to do with it:
>I recall seeing an interview with Engelbart that went over his split with the IPTO. He said that Lick came to him, and was taken with the hype with what was called “AI” at the time, that he was concerned that Engelbart’s research team at ARC had not put a focus on that yet, and that Engelbart seemed to have no intention of pursuing AI as a goal in the near future. Engelbart seemed frustrated/exasperated with Lick’s insistence on putting more attention on this. The discussion ended with Lick saying the IPTO could no longer fund him. . . . The take-away for me was Engelbart said this was “a sad parting,” because he was grateful, and had respect for Lick, but thought that he was wrong to press his team to pursue AI at that point.
https://www.quora.com/What-would-be-the-place-of-AI-in-Doug-Engelbarts-vision-of-Augmenting-Human-Intellect-How-can-we-reconsider-things-within-current-AI-developments/answer/Alan-Kay-11 https://www.quora.com/What-would-be-the-place-of-AI-in-Doug-...
- leobg 2y agoAI has meant different things to different people in different times. I think his NLS was designed to capture all of (your|a company’s|humanity’s) knowledge and then giving you the information you need when you need it at your fingertips, even with any blanks or conclusions or summaries already filled in. That is, to me, the same thing as a system knowing how Aristotle would have answered your question. (Jobs, in his speech, also, didn’t call this “AI“. He just spoke of “computers”.)
- hollerith 2y agoAnd yet when Licklider asked Engelbart to add AI to Engelbart's project, Engelbart chose to lose Licklider's support (and soon after lost his federal funding IIUC) rather than do that.