> On 19 Feb 2015, at 12:05, Vic <lug@???> wrote:
>
>
>> 10 years from now
>> we will simply ask a machine to write software for us
>
> I first heard that argument some 40 years ago. It wasn't true then, and it
> isn't true now. The reason for this is simple - code generation is a
> purely mechanical process, but defining the solution to the problem space
> requires semantic understanding, and that is the stuff of sci-fi.
Until google tried to read all the books and classify all the information on the planet, everyone said it was a pipe dream. (while this will never be 100% its astonishing what has been achieved)
I agree with all you say here, its is mechanical and it is about semantic understanding, in the past however it was inconceivable that a computer could be used to read a book thus the method of inputing the preexisting knowledge needed to be specifically coded.
Now software to apply learning and matching techniques on a scale never thought possible is already available… and you may have picked up that today Azure Machine Learning just went public. Very soon reading, mapping and analysis of the knowledge in a book we call the internet, will be a fact of life.
>
> Many years ago, I was involved in writing some tools for Z. The idea was
> that a non-programmer could specify what he wanted, and then the Z
> compiler would generate the code.
i haven’t heard of Z since uni, Z was hard work! Modern machine learning is a world apart from Z.
> The project was a spectacular failure,
> because it turns out that getting that spec to be complete and accurate is
> exactly the same job as writing the code - the spec and the implementation
> can be considered synonymous. And this situation will persist until an AI
> is created that can properly *understand* a requirement. I don't know if
> we will ever get to that point - it's not just AI, it's Artificial
> Consciousness - but it won't happen in my lifetime.
I’ve no crystal ball but i do think we can achieve a system that can dream, I think it will then deserve it's name “Lucy". One thing is for sure, we are bio-mechanical so in my mind electro-mechanical is plausible. It’s moral essence however, will only be a reflection of ourselves.
>
>> There may be more systems, but the natural evolution
>> will concentrate knowledge into fewer and fewer parts.
>
> Why? Simple laws of supply and demand imply that any such shrinkage will
> make the trade more attractive, and so lead to more recruits...
>
>> the few commodity roles will be passed to the lowest bidder
>> and this will mostly be offshore.
>
> Roles are tending to be onshored at the moment - top management is finally
> beginning to understand that the Man-Month is indeed Mythical.
>
>> Math has a natural use in all subjects and life skills
>
> Not on this side of the Atlantic, it doesn't...
>
> Vic.
>
>
>
> --
> Please post to: Hampshire@???
> Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire
> LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk
> --------------------------------------------------------------
--
Please post to: Hampshire@???
Web Interface:
https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire
LUG URL:
http://www.hantslug.org.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------
