computer-go: Possible/Impossible

["Arthur H. Britto II" <ahbritto@xxxxxxx>]

After pursing AI for twenty plus years I have come to conclusion that there
will always be nay sayers about what is possible until you can show them a
working system.  At this point they will say "Oh, you're right."

Of course, you can spend countless hours arguing with them.

Prior to showing them a working system they have a "feeling" with dozens of
not well formed reasons behind it.  Show them the flaw in their logic, and
they will come up with another reason why it can not be so.  Again, this
reason will have little thought behind it.

These people are their own worst enemy, instead saying, "I would like to see
this happen, but I can't figure out how I can get around this thought." they
say "It can NEVER be done by a computer" or  "This is why it can't ever
work."  They leave the burden of proof for others, without putting more than
a trivial amount effort in solving the problem for themselves.

Will these people ever be innovators in the field?

If you show them they are wrong, will they contribute useful work toward a
working system?

If the answer is yes, then they should read texts on AI to understand the
current debate.  A wonderful map of the debate is available from:
http://www.macrovu.com/CCTGeneralInfo.html  IMHO, the map is flawed as there
is no conclusion, just a map.  In any event, believers can point to the AI
faqs, references, & newsgroups and then get back to working on the problem.

If the answer is no, then believers might better spend their time working on
the problem directly instead of attempting to educate the hopeless.

The issue of what a computer can can't do is well debated.  To believe that
the go problem space is fundamentally different from the fundamental
problem, is wishful thinking.

It is the duty of non-believers to discover for themselves why they are
wrong.  This thought process can only improve their problem solving
abilities.  For others to provide instant answers thwarts the opportunity
for the non-believers to develop their own problem solving abilities.
Believers should only give hints, not answers.

Cheers,

Arthur Britto