Brad Rutter Quotes

Interactive computers and software will, I think, provide a less costly method of doing some kinds of inquiry, in knowledge acquisition and even reasoning and interaction.

Artificial intelligence, in fact, is obviously an intelligence transmitted by conscious subjects, an intelligence placed in equipment. It has a clear origin, in fact, in the intelligence of the human creators of such equipment.

Artificial intelligence is one of 50 things that Watson does. There is also machine learning, text-to-speech, speech-to-text, and different analytical engines - they're like little Lego bricks. You can put intelligence in any product or any process you have.

Google seems to be more intelligent than some people.

Human players have their strengths and weaknesses and Watson is the same way. He just has different strengths and weaknesses than most people.

In my view, the fact that computers caught up to humans and completely dominate humans in chess and some other domains already, that says there's evidence that, yes, in principle, they can be better programmers than humans.

IA is something that is proceeding very naturally, in most cases not even recognized by its developers for what it is.

I'm fascinated by artificial intelligence.

My principal professional objective is to introduce intelligence as the ubiquitous utility. I'd like to be the Thomas Edison of intelligence.

I believe that at the end of the century the use of words and general educated opinion will have altered so much that one will be able to speak of machines thinking without expecting to be contradicted.

The real goal of AI is to understand and build devices that can perceive, reason, act, and learn at least as well as we can.

If you want to solve very complex problems, you will have to end up letting machines work out a lot of the details for themselves, and in ways that we don't understand what they are doing.

By 2029, computers will have emotional intelligence and be convincing as people.

When people speak of creating superhumanly intelligent beings, they are usually imagining an AI project.

My goal is to create friend machines. Friendly genius machines. Machines with genius capabilities.

I am suggesting that we recognize that in network and interface research there is something as profound (and potential wild) as Artificial Intelligence.

A smart model is a good model.

Some claim that computers will, by 2050, achieve human capabilities. Of course, in some respects they already have.

We could construct a machine that is more intelligent than we can understand. It's possible Google is that kind of thing already. It scales so fast.

We have to make machines understand what they're doing, or they won't be able to come back and say, 'Why did you do that?'

As far as what is the line between human and machine? That's a great question.

I believed in realism, as summarized by John McCarthy's comment to the effect that if we worked really hard, we'd have an intelligent system in from four to four hundred years.

My car and my adding machine understand nothing: they are not in that line of business.

One of the best things to come out of the home computer revolution could be the general and widespread understanding of how severely limited logic really is.

Computers have proved to be formidable chess players. In fact, they've beaten our top human chess champions.