The Jordan Times has an article discussing the "AI Effect" -- Don't Insult Their Intelligence. Since Spielberg's film, there has been a renewed interest in intelligent machines, just like back in the early 80s. There was a huge disappointment back then, combined with a withdrawal of funding; this lead to a slump in interest, and disillusion – that's the AI effect. AI now is split into many fields, contributing in small parts to our everyday life. Not quite as impressive, but no less important.

Although I know a lot of folks slated the spielberg film I quite liked it. I never expected it to be a technically accurate portrayal of the subject as most of the diehard AI people did.

Well constructed films like AI or 2001 are useful I think in getting people interested in the subject, and exploring the possible implications. However, there is a big difference between what is possible with today's technology and the sorts of technology that are depicted in the movies.

I often think that the study of AI is similar to the alchemist's quest to turn base metals into gold in that to a large extent (strong) AI is only a theoretical possibility - a sort of educated guess. It's entirely possible that at some stage in the future people might find that the sort of computing machines we have today based on Turing machines are in some way inadequate for the task of producing an intelligent being. But from a contemporary perspective I don't see any reason to believe that strong AI isn't possible, and that it will probably eventually be achieved after several generations of clever robotics engineers put some effort into the problem.

As for funding if you look at any subject (whether it's AI or gardening) they do come in and out of fashion, usually in a cycle of every ten years or so. The cybernetically inclined might be interested to study these fashions as feedback systems.

- Bob