I took (and thoroughly enjoyed) a graduate AI class while an undergrad CS student back in the 1970s; had I completed my subsequent master's degree, I almost certainly would have done a thesis on some subject in AI (as it was, I did take a graduate class in advanced pattern recognition). I still have a entire shelf of (largely outdated) AI textbooks from that era.

That said, it's hard to find another field within computer science that has been so consistently wrong in its predictions of when 'breakthroughs' will occur. Some of the AI pioneers back in the 1950s thought we were only 10-20 years away from meaningful AI. Here were are, 60 years later, and we're still 10-20 years away. The field has made tremendous strides, but they tend to be in relatively narrow domains or applications. Generalized, all-purpose, adaptable intelligence is hard. We may yet achieve it, so something close enough to it so as to be sufficient, but I don't think it's going to happen in 10 years.

Maybe the first true AI will run the first true large-scale fusion power plant. :-) ..bruce..

Thanks for the kind words -- as I said, Wayne is working on a reboot. Wayne is one of the best coders and best game designers I know -- he was the brains behind Dungeon Master -- and so whatever he comes up with should be great. ..bruce..

Yep, it was originally on the Apple II and was then ported (and significantly enhanced) for the Atari ST. As per my other post, Wayne's working on an updated version. ..bruce..

Actually, Wayne is working on an updated version -- I'm constrained from doing so, not because of Wayne but because of a patent case I worked on as a consulting expert that put me under a protective order not to do certain types of development until the case was settled. ..bruce..

Oh, I more than approve of that. :-) I've played both the Apple II and the Atari ST versions on Windows-based emulators and used to have links to both on my website. I should probably put those up again.

For those wanting a bit more background: http://brucefwebster.com/past-projects/sundog/

Heh. Actually, I'm more than happy to see someone, anyone do a modern version of a Sundog-like game, since our original was so constrained. My favorite is Space Rangers 2 (available via Impulse.com). ..bruce..

Wayne Holder and I did it 27 years ago for the Apple II. ..bruce..

...not specifically for video games, but for software in general and particularly for custom-developed software. I've seen this a lot because of work on "failed IT project" lawsuits -- the goods vs. services distinction brings different legal standards, requirements and remedies to bear. Generally speaking, commercial off the shelf (COTS) software is usually seen as "goods", but the more customization and original development involved, the stronger the "services" argument. And, of course, the whole movement towards "software as a service" and cloud deployment muddies the waters more. ..bruce..

Thanks -- you're right. It's "Poor Little Warrior" (1958) by Brian Aldiss. I suspect it was a tongue-in-cheek response to Bradbury's "A Sound of Thunder" (1952).

Can't remember the name of the story, but (much like Bradbury's "A Sound of Thunder", though in a humorous vein) it involved a time traveler going back to hunt T-Rexes. He shoots and kills one, then strides towards the T-Rex to take a trophy...only to be met by a multitude of large external parasites abandoning the T-Rex and looking for a new host. Doesn't end well for the hunter. Anyone remember the name of this story?

And, yeah, 21 mm may not sound like much, but think of dealing with a horde of inch-long fleas, and that may bring a different image to mind. ..bruce..

The LDS Church has a very active worldwide charity organization that has provided over $1 billion in humanitarian aid (cash, goods, services) in the past 25 years. The LDS Church itself covers all administrative costs, so 100% of any donation goes to actual use. Here are some of the projects currently being funded. ..bruce..

Might as well close the comments now. :-)

Go look up Robert Austin's book on measurements and management. Read it and recognize that you've been given a task that is at best counterproductive and at worst impossible. Dust off your resume, because it may be more than one of you that are getting fired. ..bruce..

The quote above is from Jerry Weinberg, and it is true.

There's an entire brilliant, short book about this problem: Measuring and Managing Performance in Organizations by Robert Austin (1996). It's actually a fairly rigorous, somewhat philosophical work, but it is pretty unrelenting to documenting that, indeed, trying to manage by metrics almost always introduces distortions, which in turn are almost always counter-productive. The problem isn't just with IT, it's with any type of effort that seeks to reward or punish based on metrics.

The only metrics that I've found actually useful in IT are those that are predictive -- for example, aiding to estimate the actual delivery date of a project under development. The metrics that seek to somehow measure "accomplishments to date" solely for the purpose of reward or punishment are always gamed and are almost always useless. ..bruce..

Actually, this cuts both ways. As someone who has acted as an expert witness in a number of lawsuits, I usually want to see the time-sorted e-mail record where relevant, particularly if there are software developers or engineers involved (since they tend to be more, ah, blunt in their statements). I've seen large cases end up settling unfavorably for one side because of a dozen or so internal e-mails that its personnel had written (one I recall said something to the effect of "Why are we charging our client [a large specific sum of money] and delivering them garbage?").

But I fully agree with you as well: document, document, document, whether by e-mail, memo, or letter. If your firm (particularly if you're a software developer/vendor) has never been involved in a lawsuit, there is a tendency to tell yourself, "We'll make this work out; we want to keep the customer happy; we're all grown-ups here," and so rely on verbal assurances or concessions. Then when a lawsuit happens, you have no documentation -- just he-said/she-said testimony -- as to why (and how) the scope changed or the project went over-schedule/over-budget or why certain IP was used or shared or when certain key inventions were developed. ..bruce..