I recently ran across a book that's worth mentioning here:
The Brain Makers
Harvey Newquist
Sams Publishing, 1994
I mention it because although it claims to be an account of the years of
AI hype in the 1980's, there is actually very little about AI and more
that half of the book's 488 pages are devoted to the story of Lisp
machines. There are detailed accounts of the rise and fall of Symbolics,
LMI, Gold Hill, etc. This would be a good book to recommend to younger
readers of this NG who wonder what Lisp machines were all about or ask
why Lisp seems to be *dying*.
In a nutshell, Lisp was the language of AI research. Because Lisp
programs used resources differently than C or Fortran programs, hackers
found it beneficial to build special hardware for Lisp programming. In
the late 1970's and through the 1980's, there was tremendous public hype
over AI. Since the language of AI was Lisp, some people (mainly from
MIT) tried to take advantage of this situation by founding companies to
make *AI machines* (Lisp machines). They made a go if it for over a
decade, but they never achieved good market penetration because most
people didn't really know what to do with a Lisp machine and besides,
they were horribly expensive. Finally, the public lost interest in AI
because it failed to deliver much. This and other factors led to a loss
of interest in Lisp. The Lisp machine companies, which had never been
very successful financially, went bust and Lisp went back to just being
the language of AI researchers.
The reason why people get the impression that Lisp is dying is that
there was an obvious decline in Lisp activity from say, 1985 to 1995. It
should answer a lot of people's questions to know that this was because
the 1980's were a period of hype and that Lisp currently holds the
minority but stable position that it traditionally has.
The book is written by a journalist and is a popular account, so there
is little technical information. But the story of the rise and fall of
Lisp machines is basically a human one.
Tom
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
In article <············@nnrp1.deja.com>, ····@my-deja.com wrote:
> The book is written by a journalist and is a popular account, so there
> is little technical information. But the story of the rise and fall of
> Lisp machines is basically a human one.
An insider told me that the book is not very accurate when
it comes to Lispm companies.
The Symbolics Museum (Ralf M�ller's version at
http://kogs-www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/~moeller/symbolics-info/symbolics.html )
has another interesting look at Lispm companies:
http://kogs-www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/~moeller/symbolics-info/ai-business.pdf
--
Rainer Joswig, BU Partner,
ISION Internet AG, Steinh�ft 9, 20459 Hamburg, Germany
Tel: +49 40 3070 2950, Fax: +49 40 3070 2999
Email: ····················@ision.net WWW: http://www.ision.net/
In article <···································@news.is-europe.net>,
Rainer Joswig <·············@ision.net> wrote:
> In article <············@nnrp1.deja.com>, ····@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > The book is written by a journalist and is a popular account, so
there
> > is little technical information.
>
> An insider told me that the book is not very accurate when
> it comes to Lispm companies.
Yeah, I think you always have to take a journalisitc account with a
grain of salt. However, this book tends to portray the people in the
LispM companies as incompetent, crooked, or egomaniacal. So probably we
should also take those peoples' denials with caution. ;-)
Tom
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
····@my-deja.com wrote:
>Yeah, I think you always have to take a journalisitc account with a
>grain of salt. However, this book tends to portray the people in the
>LispM companies as incompetent, crooked, or egomaniacal. So probably we
>should also take those peoples' denials with caution. ;-)
for sure not incompetent!
--
Reini
····@my-deja.com writes:
> Yeah, I think you always have to take a journalisitc account with a
> grain of salt. However, this book tends to portray the people in the
> LispM companies as incompetent, crooked, or egomaniacal. So probably we
> should also take those peoples' denials with caution. ;-)
>
> Tom
I can't speak for other companies, but LMI certainly had a plethora of
incompetents and egomaniacs, and it was bought out by a crook.
In article <············@alum.mit.edu>,
Joe Marshall <·········@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>····@my-deja.com writes:
>> Yeah, I think you always have to take a journalisitc account with a
>> grain of salt. However, this book tends to portray the people in the
>> LispM companies as incompetent, crooked, or egomaniacal. So probably we
>> should also take those peoples' denials with caution. ;-)
>
>I can't speak for other companies, but LMI certainly had a plethora of
>incompetents and egomaniacs, and it was bought out by a crook.
I think any gathering of very talented people will always have a few
egomaniacs.
While I was at the Symbolics factory during the "glory days" of the
mid-'80s, it was apparent that - how to phrase this delicately? -
manufacturing quality was not always Job One, and that at least the
marketing arm of the company was laughably incompetent. I don't know
that there were any crooks, though.
-- Chuck
--
Chuck Fry -- Jack of all trades, master of none
······@chucko.com (text only please) ········@home.com (MIME enabled)
Lisp bigot, car nut, photographer, sometime guitarist and mountain biker
The addresses above are real. All spammers will be reported to their ISPs.
Chuck Fry wrote:
>
> While I was at the Symbolics factory during the "glory days" of the
> mid-'80s, it was apparent that - how to phrase this delicately? -
> manufacturing quality was not always Job One, and that at least the
> marketing arm of the company was laughably incompetent. I don't know
> that there were any crooks, though.
If there _had_ been any crooks, and if they were as bad at their task
as manufacturing was at its, how would you ever have detected them?
Does a bear change its metaclass in the woods?
"Steven M. Haflich" <·······@pacbell.net> writes:
> Chuck Fry wrote:
> >
> > While I was at the Symbolics factory during the "glory days" of the
> > mid-'80s, it was apparent that - how to phrase this delicately? -
> > manufacturing quality was not always Job One, and that at least the
> > marketing arm of the company was laughably incompetent. I don't know
> > that there were any crooks, though.
>
> If there _had_ been any crooks, and if they were as bad at their task
> as manufacturing was at its, how would you ever have detected them?
A criminal record is a good indication. Bad crooks are easier to detect.
"Steven M. Haflich" <·······@pacbell.net> writes:
> Chuck Fry wrote:
> >
> > While I was at the Symbolics factory during the "glory days" of the
> > mid-'80s, it was apparent that - how to phrase this delicately? -
> > manufacturing quality was not always Job One, and that at least the
> > marketing arm of the company was laughably incompetent. I don't know
> > that there were any crooks, though.
>
> If there _had_ been any crooks, and if they were as bad at their task
> as manufacturing was at its, how would you ever have detected them?
Earlier I wrote that one could detect crooks by thier criminal record.
This is in particular reference to Guy Montpetit, who bought out Lisp
Machine, Inc. He was convicted by the Canadian court on May 1, 1998
of buying the influence of Canadian Senator Michel Cogger. (Source:
Canadian News Digest, July 1998)
Joe Marshall wrote:
[...]
> Earlier I wrote that one could detect crooks by thier criminal record.
> This is in particular reference to Guy Montpetit, who bought out Lisp
> Machine, Inc. He was convicted by the Canadian court on May 1, 1998
> of buying the influence of Canadian Senator Michel Cogger. (Source:
> Canadian News Digest, July 1998)
Ha! Just goes to show that Canadians have failed to grasp the essential
nature of capitalist democracy...
Kaelin Colclasure <······@acm.org> writes:
> Joe Marshall wrote:
> [...]
> > Earlier I wrote that one could detect crooks by thier criminal record.
> > This is in particular reference to Guy Montpetit, who bought out Lisp
> > Machine, Inc. He was convicted by the Canadian court on May 1, 1998
> > of buying the influence of Canadian Senator Michel Cogger. (Source:
> > Canadian News Digest, July 1998)
>
> Ha! Just goes to show that Canadians have failed to grasp the essential
> nature of capitalist democracy...
Don't get caught?
Joe Marshall wrote:
>
> Kaelin Colclasure <······@acm.org> writes:
>
> > Joe Marshall wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Earlier I wrote that one could detect crooks by thier criminal record.
> > > This is in particular reference to Guy Montpetit, who bought out Lisp
> > > Machine, Inc. He was convicted by the Canadian court on May 1, 1998
> > > of buying the influence of Canadian Senator Michel Cogger. (Source:
> > > Canadian News Digest, July 1998)
> >
> > Ha! Just goes to show that Canadians have failed to grasp the essential
> > nature of capitalist democracy...
>
> Don't get caught?
That or they have better police...
:)will