Mar
11
Computer History – A British View – Part 3 of 3
By
A British film about computers from 1969. It is presented here as a historical look at how computers used to be in the 1960′s when pc’s and Macs were over 10 years away. Shown in three parts. Sorry, but the 16mm print is rather battered!
Mac EyeShadow Size 1.5 g BRAND NEW Color: MOONFLOWER
 | US $9.99 (1 Bid) End Date: Thursday Sep-09-2010 4:58:21 PDT Bid now | Add to watch list |
25 Comments
March 11th, 2010 at 11:59 am
or maybe it’s because nobody feels the need to place that much effort into something that is irrelevant compared to everything else we actually care about. Computers are developed enough…
March 11th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
how things will work, was on the discovery channel I think, great videos I never thought they knew so much but of course,in their time alot of this was more on the it might happen side of things.
March 11th, 2010 at 1:26 pm
this was their version of how things will work
March 11th, 2010 at 2:08 pm
dude i didnt know they had touch screens with 3d options! O_o
March 11th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
i wonder if the scientists featured thought one day we would watch this very video on a computer!
March 11th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
The oriental game that is normally played on the kind of board shown at 5:52 is “Go”.
It has extremely simple rules (something like 3 or 4 rules) but is so complex that (unlike chess) computers still can’t beat good human players.
Is our human brain so great or are computers just not developed enough?
I wonder if they imagined back then, that 40years later we’d have more computing power in our living rooms than they had in a whole country.
March 11th, 2010 at 4:02 pm
Well, all we know that those are also programs, so that means that viruses and worms can also be countered……….. that’s why we have ANTIVIRUSES……..
March 11th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
Nice work. keep it up. mean time come for social media marketing for esteembpo**com #LINK#
March 11th, 2010 at 5:31 pm
Nice try. Keep it up check out esteembpo + com for social media marketing. #LINK#
March 11th, 2010 at 6:02 pm
watch this vid /watch?v=cmpaAoY3SQc
5br/numbers
March 11th, 2010 at 6:23 pm
They had touch screens and 3D modelling in 1969? Wow I’m impressed!
March 11th, 2010 at 6:41 pm
That takes some programing and power for a computer to learn from its mistakes.
March 11th, 2010 at 7:37 pm
lol yea like the touch screen dude. Thats crazy and 3D stuff too. That typewriter computer is cool. It’s still pretty old they program with paper geeze.
March 11th, 2010 at 8:31 pm
I’m suprised what 1960′s computers were already able to do…
1960′s computers rock
March 11th, 2010 at 8:48 pm
Yeah, terrible consequences indeed! What about all those viruses and worms we have today?
March 11th, 2010 at 9:33 pm
very nice
March 11th, 2010 at 10:33 pm
so much paper waste..but cool documentary.
March 11th, 2010 at 10:53 pm
that is pretty cool , the computer learned how to play the game
March 11th, 2010 at 11:14 pm
Hes touching wire contacts on the kinescope(picture tube) screen. Each contact is connected to a circuit that detects the change in capacitance resultant of touching the contact. Modern touch screens work on a similar principle but use grids of wires embedded in the screen face instead of dedicated contacts for a given area of screen.
March 11th, 2010 at 11:28 pm
Mh. It’s sort of an artifact of how we like to answer with examples (“good at math” and the like) when asked what intelligence is. For most of them, it is possible to make a computer good at it, but that’s sort of beside the point. (I’m sure someone with a background in semantics would have something to add here.)
March 12th, 2010 at 12:19 am
Thats whats so interesting- the apparent quantifications that we can observe as laypersons are very misleading. I realise average AI is very simple swarm and avoidance logic- in essence, much less intelligent than a retarded ant.
March 12th, 2010 at 1:00 am
Oh, and there is probably more work (and information) in a top-class chess program than in your average game AI, the latter isn’t as complicated as you’d think. Hard, yes, but you can get away with a fairly small set of possible things to do, each of which isn’t -that- difficult to implement. Besides, you don’t usually consider future actions/reactions/etc to anywhere near the same depth as in a board game.
March 12th, 2010 at 1:28 am
So basically: We’ve got AI. It’s just that now that we have it, something like “a program that can play chess well” doesn’t seem that intelligent when you know how it works – at least if you compare it to the still elusive hard AI. That might be why we usually refer to them as “chess programs” instead of AI: They are solutions to a very (almost embarrassingly) specific problem. Do read the wikipedia article on AI, by the way, it’s interesting. The one on expert systems, too.
March 12th, 2010 at 1:49 am
I’d guess it’s because intelligence is a hard thing to define. There’s several definitions of AI in use, and many things in use today do count under the weaker ones. The problematic one, “strong AI”, is close to the problem of artificial consciousness – it requires a system that can solve anything a human can,
with no more preparation. That degree of generic problem recognition and solving is still a good way off.
March 12th, 2010 at 2:17 am
And yet we continually redefine artificial intelligence each time we attain our previous definition. My question is why.