Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Learn About the FRDCSA 'Weak AI' Project (Video)

Posted by Roblimo on from the let-us-run-your-life-for-you dept.

Today's interviewee, Andrew Dougherty, has a Web page that says he is "...an autodidact mathematician and computer scientist specializing in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Algorithmic Information Theory (AIT). He is the founder of the FRDCSA (Formalized Research Database: Cluster Study & Apply) project, a practical attempt at weak AI aimed primarily at collecting and interrelating existing software with theoretical motivation from AIT. He has made over 90 open source applications, 400 (unofficial) Debian GNU/Linux packages and 800 Perl5 modules (see http://frdcsa.org/frdcsa)." Tim Lord says Andrew's project "brings together a lot of AI algorithms, collects large sets of data for those algorithms to chew on, and writes software to do things like ... guide your whole life." As you might guess, Andrew occupies a pretty far edge of the eccentric programmer world, as you'll see from this video (and transcript). He calls himself "a serious Stallmanite" (his word), and has chosen the GPL for his software in the hopes that it will therefore help the greatest number of people. (Speaking of help, he's looking for interesting data sets and various "life rules" that can be integrated with his planning software, and one of the reasons he presented at the recent YAPC::NA was to solicit help in putting his hundreds of Perl modules onto CPAN.)

2 of 52 comments (clear)

  1. In English? Please? by X0563511 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... a practical attempt at weak AI aimed primarily at collecting and interrelating existing software with theoretical motivation from AIT

    <stares blankly>

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  2. Re:Where have all the nerds gone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Part of the reason state of the AI art is where it is now is because there is so much work on it that hasn't gone anywhere. So I don't think any attempt at improving it is a step forward, as the field has already demonstrated that there is a lot of attempts that were not a step forward. I'm not trying to say the field is static, just it will take some combination of luck and insight/vision for further contributions to actually go anywhere.