Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
AIList Digest Volume 4 Issue 142
AIList Digest Thursday, 5 Jun 1986 Volume 4 : Issue 142
Today's Topics:
Queries - Getting Started with OPS-5 & Programming Paradigms &
Prolog on IBM/PCs,
Techniques - Common LISP Style,
Physics - Space-Time Structure,
Humor - Brain Theory,
Philosophy - Metaphilosophy Journal on Computer Ethics
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 3 Jun 86 18:18:38 GMT
From: cad!nike!lll-crg!micropro!ptsfa!jeg@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (John Girard)
Subject: Getting Started with OPS-5
We would like to start experimenting with OPS-5, and have heard
that there is a public domain version available, presumably from
C-M-U.
Any help we can get on the following would be appreciated:
Where is the best source for the P-D OPS-5?
Would we be wasting our time to try the P-D version?
If so, which one can we try on an evaluation basis?
What else is needed to make it work?
If LISP is required, can we operate on a limited subset
such as XLISP? If not, what LISP would be easiest to
integrate on an evaluation basis?
Also, any recommendations on readable and usable guides to
OPS-5 will be appreciated!
Thanks!
John Girard
Pacific Bell
(415)823-1961 [USA]
{dual,ihnp4,qantel,decwrl,bellcore}ptsfa!jeg
------------------------------
Date: 3 Jun 86 12:42:33 GMT
From: ulysses!unc!mcnc!duke!jds@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Joseph D. Sloan)
Subject: Request for Programming Paradigms
A particular interest of mine is programming paradigms.
For example, how does object-oriented programming differ
from logic programming from functional programming from
procedural programming from ... I recently came across
a paper with a brief discussion of access-oriented
programming which is a new paradigm to me. Unfortunately,
I didn't very much out of the description as the context
of the article was comparison of paradigms and really
assumed familiarity. Can anyone supply me with pointers
to readable introductions to access-oriented programming?
How about articles or books on programming paradigms
in general? Reply by mail and I will summarize results
if there is enough interest. (The article I referred to
was "If Prolog is the Answer, What is the Question? or
What it Takes to Support AI Programming Paradigms" by
Daniel G. Bobrow in IEEE Trans. of Soft. Eng., Nov. 1985.
I recommend the article.)
Joe Sloan,
Box 3090
Duke University Medical Center
Durham, NC 27710
(919) 684-3754
duke!jds,
------------------------------
Date: 3 Jun 86 14:46:53 GMT
From: sdcsvax!caip!seismo!columbia!lexington.columbia.edu!polish@ucbvax
.berkeley.edu (Nathaniel Polish)
Subject: Prolog on IBM/PCs
I am looking for a version of Prolog (or other expert system building
tool) for the IBM/PC environment. I am looking for comments on the
real usefulness of these tools.
Thanks
Nat Polish@columbia-20
------------------------------
Date: 3 Jun 86 19:41:30 GMT
From: hplabs!oliveb!glacier!kestrel!king@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Dick King)
Subject: Re: Common LISP style standards.
From: michaelm@bcsaic.UUCP (michael maxwell)
We have a long list,
and we wish to apply some test to each member of the list. However, at some
point in the list, if the test returns a certain value, there is no need to
look further ...
I'm way behind in this group, so I apologize in advance if you have
seen this solution or a better one before.
You might try
(prog ()
(mapcar #'(lambda (y) (when (you-like y) (return (result-for y))))
x)))
I tried it, and it works. It doesn't seem dirty to me, and it should
be efficient. Even if the return point of a prog is such that it
forces the lexical closure to be non-vacuous, this shouldn't be a
problem when compiled.
--
Mike Maxwell
Boeing Artificial Intelligence Center
...uw-beaver!uw-june!bcsaic!michaelm
-dick
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 86 09:34:08 pdt
From: Marc Majka <majka%ubc.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
Subject: Inside Out
> ...Einstein's theory of general relativity, which models the cosmos
> as a 4 dimensional pseudo-Riemannian spacetime. ...
*pseudo*-Riemannian? I think you mean Semi-Reimannian, and that applies
to the metric, not the spacetime.
---
Marc Majka
------------------------------
Date: 4 Jun 86 06:29 EDT
From: WAnderson.wbst@Xerox.COM
Subject: Humor - Brain Theory
Conscious and subconscious mind:
In your brain are two files. One is read-write. The other is
write-only with global side effects.
(Attributed to a computer science student at Rochester Institute of
Technology.)
Bill Anderson
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 May 86 13:36:39 edt
From: rti-sel!dg_rtp!rtp41!dg_rama!bruces%mcnc.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Computer Ethics
[Forwarded from the Risks Digest by Laws@SRI-AI.]
The following is a copy of a review I wrote for a recent newsletter of the
Boston chapter of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR).
Readers of RISKS may be interested, as well.
METAPHILOSOPHY is a British journal published three times yearly which is
dedicated to considerations about particular schools, fields, and methods of
philosophy. The October 1985 issue, Computers & Ethics (Volume No. 16, Issue
No. 4), is recommended reading [...].
This issue's articles attempt to define and delimit the scope of Computer
Ethics, and examine several emerging and current concerns within the field.
One current concern is responsibility for computer-based errors. In his
article on the subject, John W. Snapper asks: "...whether it is advisable to
...write the law so that a machine is held legally liable for harm." The author
invokes Aristotle's "Nichomachean Ethics" (!) in an analysis of how computers
make decisions, and what is meant by "decision" in this context.
On the same subject, William Bechtel goes one step further, considering the
possibility that computers could one day bear not only legal, but moral
responsibility for decision-making: "When we have computer systems that ...can
be embedded in an environment and adapt their responses to that environment,
then it would seem that we have captured all those features of human beings
that we take into account when we hold them responsible."
Deborah G. Johnson discusses another concern: ownership of computer programs.
In "Should Computer Programs Be Owned?," Ms. Johnson criticizes utilitarian
arguments for ownership, as well as arguments based upon Locke's labor theory
of property. The proper limits to extant legal protections, including
copyrights, patents, and trade secrecy laws, are called into question.
Other emerging concerns include the need to educate the public on the dangers
and abuses of computers, and the role of computers in education. To this end,
Philip A. Pecorino and Walter Maner present a proposal for a college level
course in Computer Ethics, and Marvin J. Croy addresses the ethics of
computer-assisted instruction.
Dan Lloyd, in his provocative but highly speculative article, "Frankenstein's
Children," envisions a world where cognitive simulation AI succeeds in
producing machine consciousness, resulting in a possible ethical clash of the
rights of artificial minds with human values.
The introductory article, James H. Moor's "What is Computer Ethics," is an
ambitious attempt to define Computer Ethics, and to explain its importance.
According to Moor, the development and proliferation of computers can rightly
be termed "revolutionary": "The revolutionary feature of computers is their
logical malleability. Logical malleability assures the enormous application of
computer technology." Moor goes on to assert that the Computer Revolution, like
the Industrial Revolution, will transform "many of our human activities and
social institutions," and will "leave us with policy and conceptual vacuums
about how to use computer technology."
An important danger inherent in computers is what Moor calls "the invisibility
factor." In his own words: "One may be quite knowledgeable about the inputs
and outputs of a computer and only dimly aware of the internal processing."
These hidden internal operations can be intentionally employed for unethical
purposes; what Moor calls "Invisible abuse," or can contain "Invisible
programming values": value judgments of the programmer that reside, insidious
and unseen, in the program.
Finally, in the appendix, "Artificial Intelligence, Biology, and Intentional
States," editor Terrell Ward Bynum argues against the concept that "intentional
states" (i.e. belief, desire, expectation) are causally dependent upon
biochemistry, and thus cannot exist within a machine.
If you're at all like me, you probably find reading philosophy can be "tough
going," and METAPHILOSOPHY is no exception. References to unfamiliar works,
and the use of unfamiliar terms occasionally necessitated my reading
passages several times before extracting any meaning from them. The topics,
however, are quite relevant and their treatment is, for the most part,
lively and interesting. With its well-written introductory article, diverse
survey of current concerns, and fairly extensive bibliography, this issue of
METAPHILOSOPHY is an excellent first source for those new to the field of
Computer Ethics.
[METAPHILOSOPHY, c/o Expediters of the Printed Word Ltd., 515 Madison Avenue,
Suite 1217, New York, NY 10022]
Bruce A. Sesnovich mcnc!rti-sel!dg_rtp!sesnovich
Data General Corp. rti-sel!dg_rtp!sesnovich%mcnc@csnet-relay.arpa
Westboro, MA "Problems worthy of attack
prove their worth by hitting back"
------------------------------
End of AIList Digest
********************
