Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #94880 > unrolled thread

"GOG" (1954) - "HAL"s Daddy ?

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  "GOG" (1954) - "HAL"s Daddy ? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-01 04:48 -0500
    Re: "GOG" (1954) - "HAL"s Daddy ? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-01 13:13 +0100
      Re: "GOG" (1954) - "HAL"s Daddy ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-01 16:04 +0000
      Re: "GOG" (1954) - "HAL"s Daddy ? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-01 17:58 -0500
        Re: "GOG" (1954) - "HAL"s Daddy ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-02 10:36 +0000
      Re: "GOG" (1954) - "HAL"s Daddy ? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-01 20:14 -0500

#94880 — "GOG" (1954) - "HAL"s Daddy ?

Film.

Russians hack 'electronic brain' in a
mil space-development base. It's
connected to everything. Maybe a
crude crude kind of 'AI'.

Note units back then were lucky to
do 100K ops per second.

"Gog" - actually the name of a kinda "R2-D2"
robot controlled by the central computer -
does a lot of damage. This includes a reactor
overload. Nobody seemed TOO worried about
extreme radiation then however, hey, you'll
just feel funky for a day or two  :-)

The presumed Russians kept attacking the
base with supersonic fly-overs - using
some 300db hypersonic weapon. Shades
of "Havana Syndrome" !!!

Final scene, a sat launch - V2 rocket  :-)

Anyway, clearly the INTEREST in "AI" was
already there in the early 1950s. In this
film it was not represented as a "personality"
per-se, just connected enough so it could be
guided to do damage. Latter 60s though, 'HAL'
and friends, WERE represented as 'personalities'.

Do rec "Colossus - the Forbin Project" (1970). That
seems a little closer to our current situation
despite the ancient-tech stuff.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#94889

On 2026-11-01 10:48, c186282 wrote:
> Anyway, clearly the INTEREST in "AI" was
> already there in the early 1950s. In this
> film it was not represented as a "personality"
> per-se, just connected enough so it could be
> guided to do damage. Latter 60s though, 'HAL'
> and friends, WERE represented as 'personalities'.

In some of Asimov short histories, a super-brain or super computer ruled 
the world despite humans. Everybody happy.

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.
        ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94892

On 01/11/2026 12:13, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> In some of Asimov short histories, a super-brain or super computer ruled 
> the world despite humans. Everybody happy.

It would be one hell of an AI to do a worse job than
1/. Putin
2/. The EU
3/. King Donald
4/. The Ayatollahs
5/. Xi Ping
6/. Kim Jong Un

Look I know running the world is a really shitty job, but really, should 
we be leaving it up to these third rate psycopaths?

-- 
Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94904

On 11/1/26 07:13, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2026-11-01 10:48, c186282 wrote:
>> Anyway, clearly the INTEREST in "AI" was
>> already there in the early 1950s. In this
>> film it was not represented as a "personality"
>> per-se, just connected enough so it could be
>> guided to do damage. Latter 60s though, 'HAL'
>> and friends, WERE represented as 'personalities'.
> 
> In some of Asimov short histories, a super-brain or super computer ruled 
> the world despite humans. Everybody happy.

   Happy ... yea, sure ..........

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94923

On 01/11/2026 22:58, c186282 wrote:
> On 11/1/26 07:13, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2026-11-01 10:48, c186282 wrote:
>>> Anyway, clearly the INTEREST in "AI" was
>>> already there in the early 1950s. In this
>>> film it was not represented as a "personality"
>>> per-se, just connected enough so it could be
>>> guided to do damage. Latter 60s though, 'HAL'
>>> and friends, WERE represented as 'personalities'.
>>
>> In some of Asimov short histories, a super-brain or super computer 
>> ruled the world despite humans. Everybody happy.
> 
>    Happy ... yea, sure ..........
> 
Serenity
Equilibrium
Bliss
The Giver

-- 
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
..I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#94910

Note :

Interest/speculation about electronic "AI" goes
all the way back into the 1800s, when even
electricity was barely known to the larger public.

To a point, "smart machines" go back into
the ancient Greek tales - usually made
by Hephaestus. Little 'robots' have been
made for about 2000 years, even Da Vinci
built at least one 'mechanical being' to
amuse his patrons.

People ascribed some kind of intelligence
to them based on appearances, not because
the little cog/lever/gear things HAD any.
Some Arab tales featured metal/mechanical
horsemen.

E.T.A. Hoffmann wrote "Sandman" in the early
1800s, about a female-seeming robot SO good
that some guy falls in love with it - then
offs himself when he finds out she's mechanical.
Even Freud quoted it when speaking of 'alienation'.

Lang's "Metropolis" and Capek's "R.U.R." are
often used as a benchmarks of "AI" stories ...
though Capek's 'robots' were closer to engineered
biologics. Verne also wrote of a total-automation
society in the mid 1800s.

See :
https://www.history.com/articles/artificial-intelligence-fiction

Thing is, though the old authors sometimes got things
surprisingly right, it wasn't until the advent of
computers, 'electronic brains', that the subject began
to be more Real. 'AI' work began WAY back when UNIVACs
were still in use. A few wrong turns and a lot of
excessive optimism, but now we DO have the computing
power and improving methods to make SOME kind of
e-beings.

Anthropic's IPO papers last week had 100 pages - with
examples - of how "AI" now acts a lot like a 'person'
and included warnings about where such issues point.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web