|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Kinds of winter
Nothing in 20 years?
The "lead" of this article suggests that winter set in in "the 1990s" and has been there ever since. That's not a winter, that's an ice age.
Is it really plausible that there has been 20 years of unrelieved gloom in AI, right through the entire web era? Search engines? Semantic web? Free machine translation from public web services? Siri? Even if we're still short of personal jetpacks, recent decades have delivered some usable (we are using them for fun and profit) advances in traditional AI targets.
So the "winter" of the 1990s has clearly moved past. Have there been others since? (semantic web) Are we on an upswing or a downswing at present?
- Agree. We are in an AI summer, since around the millennium. Someone needs to add a new chapter. ---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 00:41, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
- Added a paragraph to the lead to make this clear. ---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 00:52, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Stick to the point
I appreciate there has been a lot of work here but this page is a rambling shamble of mainly here-say from a bye-gone era of lies told at the time by people you would not trust to wash their hands in a restaurant.
Stick to the topic of "The AI-Winter" as it was when the term was coined.
And on the subject of Coins .. the reason for all this nonsense is (as it always is) Money and human lies .. That is why the money came and went because the people involved told whopping great lies to get investment. The idea of an "AI Winter" should be held up as an example of why people should not lie for money ..
If computers were intelligent, no matter how artificial, the one thing they would not tolerate is the lies humans tell in the pursuit of wealth.
- This is a well-cited article talking about history. This is a real thing that really happened. I'm not sure what the problem is. ---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 00:53, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
- As a semipro lecturer on this topic for decades, I support the view of CharlesGillingham, and consider this article a worthwhile example of the kind of knowledge work that Wikipedia was designed for. --Bernd.Brincken (talk) 18:09, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Make your mind up
"The report led to the complete dismantling of AI research in England. AI research continued in only a few top universities (Edinburgh, Essex and Sussex)." is contradictory! If it had been completely dismantled it could not have continued. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 15:28, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
May it be,
that all this hoo-ha is only propaganda for misdirecting the small peoples and other nations? Is it believable, is it probable (in a mathematical sense), that ultra successful technologies would be abruptly stopped for - nothing?? Is it worthwhile, if an encyclopaedia like wikipedia undertakes common and threadbarely political propaganda-lies 1:1 and without any comment, without critical view? Is this still an encyclopaedia then? Hella — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 19:22, 14 January 2018 (UTC) p.s. We shouldn't forget, that the IT-, AI-, nuclear- and biogenetics-researches are the most important columns of all "strategic interests", so the "AI-winters" and all this drivel are only propaganda for covering the own military goals ... Hey folks, here' reading adults! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 19:31, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on AI winter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080921220453/http://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/cognition/papers/roger/chi90.html to http://human-factors.arc.nasa.gov/cognition/papers/roger/chi90.html
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/far/ch9.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
You may set the
|checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting
|needhelp= to your help request.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
If you are unable to use these tools, you may set
|needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.