What do you think?
Rate this book
God and Golem, Inc.; a Comment on Certain Points Where Cybernetics Impinges on Religion
The new and rapidly growing field of communication sciences owes as much to Norbert Wiener as to any one man. He coined the word for it--cybernetics. In God & Golem, Inc., the author concerned himself with major points in cybernetics which are relevant to religious issues. The first point he considers is that of the machine which learns. While learning is a property almost exclusively ascribed to the self-conscious living system, a computer now exists which not only can be programmed to play a game of checkers, but one which can "learn" from its past experience and improve on its own game. For a time, the machine was able to beat its inventor at checkers. "It did win," writes the author, "and it did learn to win; and the method of its learning was no different in principle from that of the human being who learns to play checkers. A second point concerns machines which have the capacity to reproduce themselves. It is our commonly held belief that God made man in his own image. The propagation of the race may also be interpreted as a function in which one living being makes another in its own image. But the author demonstrates that man has made machines which are "very well able to make other machines in their own image," and these machine images are not merely pictorial representations but operative images. Can we then God is to Golem as man is to Machines? in Jewish legend, golem is an embryo Adam, shapeless and not fully created, hence a monster, an automation. The third point considered is that of the relation between man and machine. The concern here is ethical. "render unto man the things which are man's and unto the computer the things which are the computer's," warns the author. In this section of the book, Dr. Wiener considers systems involving elements of man and machine. The book is written for the intellectually alert public and does not involve any highly technical knowledge. It is based on lectures given at Yale, at the Société Philosophique de Royaumont, and elsewhere.
Hardcover
First published January 1, 1964
23 people are currently reading
1019 people want to read
About the author
Norbert Wiener
126 books172 followersNorbert Wiener was an American mathematician and philosopher. He was Professor of Mathematics at MIT. Wiener is considered the father of cybernetics, a formalization of the notion of feedback, with implications for engineering, systems control, computer science, biology, philosophy, and the organization of society.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 33 reviews
October 20, 2017
This book's primary conclusion, that humans must recognize the ethical responsibility of thinking through the possible impact upon humanity of any new technology _before_ implementing it, is one you could find in a dozen high-profile books of the past decade. What's notable about this book, aside from a prose style that's surprisingly engaging for a mathematician, is that Wiener easily identified most of today's vexing issues regarding the ethical use of technology over fifty years ago, before the IBM System/360 was even on the market.
October 6, 2013
Book Review – God and Golem, Inc. by Norbert Wiener
“Knowledge is inextricably intertwined with communication, power with control and the evolution of human purposes with ethics and the whole normative side of religion.”
The above statement, to my mind, is founding Wiener’s quest for looking in to where and how cybernetics impinges on religion. He casts the book as a primer to the study of relationship or links between cybernetics and religion; acknowledging the violence he may cause by venturing into this field, he devotes considerable thought in laying down the method or approach of how it should be studied – in his view – with the spirit of an “operating room”.
Wiener thematises the discussion by constructing a comparative narrative between ‘God and Man’ and ‘Man and Machine’ – in other words, between ‘Creator’ and ‘Creature’, and identifies three concerns related to Cybernetics which he thinks are the most relevant to religious issues – 1. Machines which can learn; 2. Machines which can reproduce themselves; 3. Coordination of man and machine.
Firstly, the idea of machine learning is problematized by the notion that only ‘self-conscious’ systems can ‘learn’. Wiener states that by ‘machine’ he mean the systems which take certain input signal(s) and transform it to give output(s). So, if a machine can improvise its performance, it is said to learn – giving the example of chess playing machine, author skirts the man-machine duality by discussing that – the ‘intelligence’ displayed by the machine is essentially of the one who programmed it, at the same time, one can’t predict completely how this intelligence will play out. Although the author classifies the processes which a machine can learn and the dependence on the objective criterion of merit and invokes Nueman’s idea of bringing a machine to saturation state. However, such a conception is quite out-dated in the present scheme of technological development – as the author’s prediction of ultimately chess machines being saturated is not valid, in fact a chess playing computer—Deep Blue defeated the chess grandmaster Garry Kaparov in 1997, after Kasprov got better of the machine in 1996 . One important observation to make here is that of the historicity of the problematic of ‘Artificial Intelligence’ – Samuel’s checker-playing machine was able to attract largely similar concerns—of replicating, augmenting or replacing human intelligence with that of machine’s—as that of today’s smartphones.
Drawing the distinction between learning of an individual and phylogenetic learning, Wiener enters in to the complex terrain of reproduction of machines. Taking a Darwinian route to the question: ‘What is the image of a machine?’, Wiener gives the classification of a pictorial image and an operative image. While one can summarize the reproduction problem with the following aphorism from the text – “…a hen is merely an egg’s way of making another egg … the machine may generate the message, and the message may generate another machine.” The author frames the discussion lucidly by invoking the creationist and Darwinian notions in the context of the machine, however, one subtle theme which he does not stress much upon, is of identity of the machine. While he clearly states that machine’s reproduction is very different from biological reproduction, however, he still is tempted to draw similarities between the two – and in the process, it seems to my mind, that the real trouble making question is to how build a notion of identity of the machine.
The problem of identity of machine provides a perfect link to the third concern raised by Wiener – of that of coordination of man and machine. Author spends a lot of time exploring links with the Golem and black magic, and technology, to arrive at the concluding characteristic between the two – that of ‘literal mindedness’. He gives a brilliant analogy with atomic warfare to highlight the point of our inability to see the consequences of automation. This inability, I think, gives rise to lot of speculation and apprehension as well, one of which Wiener puts as: “The gadget minded people often have the illusion that a highly automatized world will make smaller claims on human ingenuity than does the present one and will take over from us our need for difficult thinking, as Roman slave who was also a Greek philosopher might have done for his master.” He negates this argument by stating that – “A goal seeking mechanism will not necessarily seek our goals until we design it for that purpose, and in that designing we must foresee all steps of the process for which it is designed, instead of exercising a tentative foresight which goes up to a certain point, and can be continued from that point on as new difficulties arise…”. Wiener may sound convincing, but one can easily accuse him of being technologically deterministic – which brings me to the larger argument that I would like to make – that it is impossible to figure out the relationship between man and machine without co-constructivist or phenomenological approaches. To be fair to Wiener, he is not technologically deterministic all throughout, and does state that: “The world of future will be an ever demanding struggle against the limitations of our intelligence, not a comfortable hammock in which we can lie down to be waited upon by our robot slaves.”
In the last sections of the book, Wiener takes up the case of relation between man and machine more explicitly, and gives an overview of what he feels the math-centric inter-disciplinary nature of cybernetics would be like. While discussing the former, he develops interesting ideas of mechanic-human systems in relation to problems of prostheses and translation. And in the case of latter, he critiques the poor use of mathematics in social sciences. Even though he concedes the importance of ideas of cybernetics in sociology and economic, however, being a mathematician his slightly positivist stand on math and machine is evident. Overall, Wiener does succeed in his attempt to connect few dots between cybernetics and religion, and since this book was written before the theories of social construction of technology came into being, one must appreciate Wiener’s attempt to cross disciplinary boundaries and presenting ideas on machine in new light.
“Knowledge is inextricably intertwined with communication, power with control and the evolution of human purposes with ethics and the whole normative side of religion.”
The above statement, to my mind, is founding Wiener’s quest for looking in to where and how cybernetics impinges on religion. He casts the book as a primer to the study of relationship or links between cybernetics and religion; acknowledging the violence he may cause by venturing into this field, he devotes considerable thought in laying down the method or approach of how it should be studied – in his view – with the spirit of an “operating room”.
Wiener thematises the discussion by constructing a comparative narrative between ‘God and Man’ and ‘Man and Machine’ – in other words, between ‘Creator’ and ‘Creature’, and identifies three concerns related to Cybernetics which he thinks are the most relevant to religious issues – 1. Machines which can learn; 2. Machines which can reproduce themselves; 3. Coordination of man and machine.
Firstly, the idea of machine learning is problematized by the notion that only ‘self-conscious’ systems can ‘learn’. Wiener states that by ‘machine’ he mean the systems which take certain input signal(s) and transform it to give output(s). So, if a machine can improvise its performance, it is said to learn – giving the example of chess playing machine, author skirts the man-machine duality by discussing that – the ‘intelligence’ displayed by the machine is essentially of the one who programmed it, at the same time, one can’t predict completely how this intelligence will play out. Although the author classifies the processes which a machine can learn and the dependence on the objective criterion of merit and invokes Nueman’s idea of bringing a machine to saturation state. However, such a conception is quite out-dated in the present scheme of technological development – as the author’s prediction of ultimately chess machines being saturated is not valid, in fact a chess playing computer—Deep Blue defeated the chess grandmaster Garry Kaparov in 1997, after Kasprov got better of the machine in 1996 . One important observation to make here is that of the historicity of the problematic of ‘Artificial Intelligence’ – Samuel’s checker-playing machine was able to attract largely similar concerns—of replicating, augmenting or replacing human intelligence with that of machine’s—as that of today’s smartphones.
Drawing the distinction between learning of an individual and phylogenetic learning, Wiener enters in to the complex terrain of reproduction of machines. Taking a Darwinian route to the question: ‘What is the image of a machine?’, Wiener gives the classification of a pictorial image and an operative image. While one can summarize the reproduction problem with the following aphorism from the text – “…a hen is merely an egg’s way of making another egg … the machine may generate the message, and the message may generate another machine.” The author frames the discussion lucidly by invoking the creationist and Darwinian notions in the context of the machine, however, one subtle theme which he does not stress much upon, is of identity of the machine. While he clearly states that machine’s reproduction is very different from biological reproduction, however, he still is tempted to draw similarities between the two – and in the process, it seems to my mind, that the real trouble making question is to how build a notion of identity of the machine.
The problem of identity of machine provides a perfect link to the third concern raised by Wiener – of that of coordination of man and machine. Author spends a lot of time exploring links with the Golem and black magic, and technology, to arrive at the concluding characteristic between the two – that of ‘literal mindedness’. He gives a brilliant analogy with atomic warfare to highlight the point of our inability to see the consequences of automation. This inability, I think, gives rise to lot of speculation and apprehension as well, one of which Wiener puts as: “The gadget minded people often have the illusion that a highly automatized world will make smaller claims on human ingenuity than does the present one and will take over from us our need for difficult thinking, as Roman slave who was also a Greek philosopher might have done for his master.” He negates this argument by stating that – “A goal seeking mechanism will not necessarily seek our goals until we design it for that purpose, and in that designing we must foresee all steps of the process for which it is designed, instead of exercising a tentative foresight which goes up to a certain point, and can be continued from that point on as new difficulties arise…”. Wiener may sound convincing, but one can easily accuse him of being technologically deterministic – which brings me to the larger argument that I would like to make – that it is impossible to figure out the relationship between man and machine without co-constructivist or phenomenological approaches. To be fair to Wiener, he is not technologically deterministic all throughout, and does state that: “The world of future will be an ever demanding struggle against the limitations of our intelligence, not a comfortable hammock in which we can lie down to be waited upon by our robot slaves.”
In the last sections of the book, Wiener takes up the case of relation between man and machine more explicitly, and gives an overview of what he feels the math-centric inter-disciplinary nature of cybernetics would be like. While discussing the former, he develops interesting ideas of mechanic-human systems in relation to problems of prostheses and translation. And in the case of latter, he critiques the poor use of mathematics in social sciences. Even though he concedes the importance of ideas of cybernetics in sociology and economic, however, being a mathematician his slightly positivist stand on math and machine is evident. Overall, Wiener does succeed in his attempt to connect few dots between cybernetics and religion, and since this book was written before the theories of social construction of technology came into being, one must appreciate Wiener’s attempt to cross disciplinary boundaries and presenting ideas on machine in new light.
August 5, 2021
O carte scrisa acum 60 de ani de parintele ciberneticii.
O parte din subiecte sunt depasite dar o mare parte din intrebarile pe care si le pune autorul sunt inca de actualitate.
Omenirea a deschis cutia Pandorei in momentul in care a investit timp si cunoastere in domeniul inteligentei artificiale. As fi curioasa ce ar spune autorul despre momentul prezent. Din pacate Norbert Wiener nu mai este printre noi din 1964.
"Daca fiecare pacient ar ajunge sa-l priveasca pe fiecare doctor nu doar ca salvatorul, ci si ca pe calaul sau? Ar putea medicul sa supravietuiasca acestei sarcini de a alege intre bine si rau? Ar putea omenirea insasi sa supravietuiasca acestei noi ordini a lucrurilor?
Este relativ usor sa promovezi binele si sa lupti impotriva raului cand binele si raul sunt fata in fata, pe pozitii foarte clare si cand cei de cealalta parte sunt dusmanii nostri netagaduiti, iar cei din tabara noastra ne sunt aliati de incredere. Dar ce se va intampla cand va trebui sa ne intrebam mereu cine ne sunt prietenii si cine dusmanii? Dar, mai mult decat atat, ce se va petrece cand decizia va fi incredintata unei forte magice inexorabile sau unei masini care nu poate fi induplecata, careia va trebui sa-i punem dinainte intrebarile corecte, fara a intelege pe deplin operatiunile procesului prin care ni se va raspunde?
(...) Lumea viitorului va fi o lupta din ce in ce mai acerba impotriva limitarilor inteligentei umane, si nu un hamac confortabil in care sa ne putem intinde spre a fi slujiti de sclavi roboti."(pag 59)
O parte din subiecte sunt depasite dar o mare parte din intrebarile pe care si le pune autorul sunt inca de actualitate.
Omenirea a deschis cutia Pandorei in momentul in care a investit timp si cunoastere in domeniul inteligentei artificiale. As fi curioasa ce ar spune autorul despre momentul prezent. Din pacate Norbert Wiener nu mai este printre noi din 1964.
"Daca fiecare pacient ar ajunge sa-l priveasca pe fiecare doctor nu doar ca salvatorul, ci si ca pe calaul sau? Ar putea medicul sa supravietuiasca acestei sarcini de a alege intre bine si rau? Ar putea omenirea insasi sa supravietuiasca acestei noi ordini a lucrurilor?
Este relativ usor sa promovezi binele si sa lupti impotriva raului cand binele si raul sunt fata in fata, pe pozitii foarte clare si cand cei de cealalta parte sunt dusmanii nostri netagaduiti, iar cei din tabara noastra ne sunt aliati de incredere. Dar ce se va intampla cand va trebui sa ne intrebam mereu cine ne sunt prietenii si cine dusmanii? Dar, mai mult decat atat, ce se va petrece cand decizia va fi incredintata unei forte magice inexorabile sau unei masini care nu poate fi induplecata, careia va trebui sa-i punem dinainte intrebarile corecte, fara a intelege pe deplin operatiunile procesului prin care ni se va raspunde?
(...) Lumea viitorului va fi o lupta din ce in ce mai acerba impotriva limitarilor inteligentei umane, si nu un hamac confortabil in care sa ne putem intinde spre a fi slujiti de sclavi roboti."(pag 59)
September 17, 2015
This is a useful historical text to consider in debates about how far to entrust decisions to search engines, expert computer systems, unmanned aerial vehicles, and other automated agents. Wiener, succinctly and with persuasive examples, makes an argument similar to Joseph Weizenbaum's Computer Power and Human Reason about the necessity of drawing on the judgment of people. Short as it is, this book meanders somewhat. One could easily become derailed near the beginning with some highly speculative technical mumbo-jumbo (it almost seems that Wiener threw it in for that purpose), and he also digresses for commentary on the U.S.-Soviet ideological battles of the day. Furthermore, religious references are restricted to the very beginning.
September 29, 2022
Algunas observaciones de gran claridad y presciencia, pero en general el libro es más una curiosidad que otra cosa debido a los avances técnicos desde entonces. La relación entre religión y cibernética al final tiene un desarrollo insatisfactorio.
October 27, 2024
Norbert Wiener's "God & Golem, Inc." is a remarkably prescient exploration of the intersection between cybernetics, religion, and the human condition. Written in 1963, its core insights about the power and limitations of machines, the dangers of "gadget worship," and the need for ethical responsibility in technological development resonate even more strongly today. The essence of the book lies in Wiener's brilliant use of analogy, comparing the then-nascent field of artificial intelligence to ancient concepts of magic and creation. This surprisingly effective framework allows him to explore profound questions about free will, determinism, and the nature of consciousness without resorting to traditional theological arguments or metaphysical traps. For those seeking to understand religion without biases, this book offers a fresh, secular perspective, allowing one to examine the human impulses behind religious belief through the lens of scientific inquiry. In a world where traditional religious adherence is on the decline, "God & Golem, Inc." provides a powerful framework for meaning-making and sense-making, prompting reflection on the evolving relationship between humans and technology, and the enduring questions about our place in the universe. I particularly enjoyed the intellectual honesty and interdisciplinary approach, finding Wiener's blend of scientific rigor and philosophical depth both stimulating and enlightening. It's a book that stays with you long after you finish reading, prompting ongoing reflection on the ever-blurring lines between creator and creation.
August 11, 2024
This book is a surprisingly fun but deadly serious exploration of cybernetics, and especially the (then) foreseeable advent of a highly machinated world. Wiener first shows that we as a society must take machines seriously, illustrating their capacity to learn complex games and self reproduce. Then he moves to an interesting argument of the importance of a careful religious and ethical consideration of how to live in the context of automation.
I really enjoyed his good humor, but i especially appreciated his candor. First, he's clear that it's important to demonstrate the credibility of the what if. Then he is fierce in his criticisms of careless and self serving analysts
I really enjoyed his good humor, but i especially appreciated his candor. First, he's clear that it's important to demonstrate the credibility of the what if. Then he is fierce in his criticisms of careless and self serving analysts
August 22, 2021
I must say Norbert Wiener was a genius. His ideas were punctual in analyzing the role of machines on our life. The reader may think that this book analyzes the issue from the usual perspective of many books that criticize the effects of technology on the world, but Wiener tackled the issue from a deep angle, and he presented his arguments from a wide range of possibilities. His book could be consider as a valuable guide to AI danger and its consequences. Wiener discussed the problem from a philosophical, scientific and religious views. Although the book is very old, the ideas that the author presented still relevant today. I really recommend this book, not to only for those who work on the field Of AI and computer science, but also to those who are interested in philosophy and science in general.
October 4, 2015
Definitely not worth picking up, despite its awesome title and neat cover design. Wiener is rambling, self-consciously florid and ultimately regurgitates some of the most facile musings on his theme of 'cybernetics + religion' one can possibly imagine.
April 1, 2025
God and Golem is a classic computer science essay. It reflects Weiner’s wide-ranging interests. Weiner spends some time on the issue of Creation and God creating Man in his own image. Weiner proudly asserts his distain for Genesis, yet does draw something from the parallel of God creating Man in his own image and then men creating machines, though it would appear that generally he is talking about computers. This is apparent on page 32 as he defines a machine as “For us a machine is device for converting incoming messages into outgoing messages”. This is a surprisingly narrow definition of machine (or computer) coming from Weiner. Wouldn’t an engineer normally define a machine as a device physically expressing the creators’ intention as well as fulfilling a specific function. Perhaps in 1964 very few would have drawn a distinction between hardware and software. Early on in the book, Weiner addresses a few apparent theological paradoxes. For example in a discussion on the book of Job on page 17 Weiner makes the following observations:
On page 30 Weiner makes an odd statement, that machines can reproduce. I could not discern what specifically he means by this but it is an observable fact that while a ‘simple’ unicellular organism can make functional copies of itself (and requires not outside help to do so), the summit of human technology, the massively parallel processing super-computer cannot make functional copies of itself.
While Weiner does spend some time on the theme of Man creating Machines in his own image, he does not explore how the Creator’s personality (or worldview) may affect the image being created. If one applies Weiner’s ideas to Artificial Intelligence, then the issue of AI Creator’s morality comes into play. If AI creators (or financiers) have a Ubermensh complex, then one should not be surprised if AI becomes a subtle and manipulative social engineering and propaganda machine. Something that would cause even Orwell and Aldous Huxley to loose sleep... A Big Brother with VERY good marketing.
Thus, if we do not lose ourselves in the dogmas of omnipotence and omniscience, the conflict between God and the Devil is real conflict, and God is something less than absolutely omnipotent. He is actually engaged in a conflict with his creature,in which he may very well loose the game. And yet his creature is made by him according to his own free will and would seem to derive all its possibility of action from God himself. Can God play a significant game with his own creature? Can any creator, even a limited one, play a significant game with his own creature?Well this theological paradox stands only if you exclude creatures with free will.... Much of this book is Weiner’s theological spin on certain issues. He appears to have read Dostoyevsky as on page 52 he states “For whether we believe or not in God and his greater glory, not all things are equally permitted to us.” Which of course raises the question “Why not?” If Weiner were living today, I wonder what he would say about a hard-nosed materialist like Richard Dawkins who recently declared himself a “cultural-Christian”.... Now the philosopher Frederick Nietzsche would have nothing but contempt for atheists such as Dawkins who reject the Christian God, but would like to keep Judeo-Christian morality. In his 1889 essay Twilight of the Idols (ix.5), Nietzsche cynically observed:
"G. Eliot. They are rid of the Christian God and now believe all the more firmly that they must cling to Christian morality. That is an English consistency; we do not wish to hold it against little moralistic females à la Eliot. In England one must rehabilitate oneself after every little emancipation from theology by showing in a veritably awe-inspiring manner what a moral fanatic one is. That is the penance they pay there.In his autobiography (Surprised by Joy), shortly after WWI when he began his university studies Lewis observed that little had changed since Nietzsche’s initial observations (1955 : 209-210)
"We others hold otherwise. When one gives up the Christian faith, one pulls the right to Christian morality out from under one's feet . This morality is by no means self-evident: this point has to be exhibited again and again, despite the English flatheads. Christianity is a system, a whole view of things thought out together. By breaking one main concept out of it, the faith in God, one breaks the whole: nothing necessary remains in one's hands. Christianity presupposes that man does not know, cannot know, what is good for him, what evil: he believes in God, who alone knows it. Christian morality is a command; its origin is transcendent; it is beyond all criticism, all right to criticism; it has truth only if God is the truth ⎯ it stands or falls with faith in God.
"When the English actually believe that they know 'intuitively' what is good and evil, when they therefore suppose that they no longer require Christianity as the guarantee of morality, we merely witness the effects of the dominion of the Christian value judgment and an expression of the strength and depth of this dominion: such that the origin of English morality has been forgotten, such that the very conditional character of its right to existence is no longer felt. For the English, morality is not yet a problem."
“But there were in those days all sorts of blankets, insulators, and insurances which enabled one to get all the conveniences of Theism, without believing in God. The English Hegelians, writers like T. H. Green, Bradley, and Bosanquet (then mighty names), dealt in precisely such wares. The Absolute Mind — better still, the Absolute — was impersonal, or it knew itself (but not us?) only in us, and it was so absolute that it wasn't really much more like a mind than anything else. And anyway, the more muddled one got about it and the more contradictions one committed, the more this proved that our discursive thought moved only on the level of "Appearance", and "Reality" must be somewhere else. And where else but, of course, in the Absolute? There, not here, was "the fuller splendour" behind the "sensuous curtain". The emotion that went with all this was certainly religious. But this was a religion that cost nothing. We could talk religiously about the Absolute: but there was no danger of Its doing anything about us. It was "there"; safely and immovably "there". It would never come "here", never (to be blunt) make a nuisance of Itself. This quasi-religion was all a one-way street; all eros (as Dr. Nygren would say) steaming up, but no agape darting down. There was nothing to fear; better still, nothing to obey.”So part of Dawkins recent comments (calling himself a ‘Cultural Christian’) may come from a growing realisation that Islam could take over Europe or at least gain political influence. While people like Dawkins had great fun criticising Christianity, criticising Islam is not all fun and games. Ask Salmon Rushdie. Ask the Charlie Hebdo survivors or Bataclan survivors... Who knows if the hard-nosed materialists like Weiner or Dawkins that so dominated Western culture in the 20th century, may be on their way out in the 21st.
On page 30 Weiner makes an odd statement, that machines can reproduce. I could not discern what specifically he means by this but it is an observable fact that while a ‘simple’ unicellular organism can make functional copies of itself (and requires not outside help to do so), the summit of human technology, the massively parallel processing super-computer cannot make functional copies of itself.
While Weiner does spend some time on the theme of Man creating Machines in his own image, he does not explore how the Creator’s personality (or worldview) may affect the image being created. If one applies Weiner’s ideas to Artificial Intelligence, then the issue of AI Creator’s morality comes into play. If AI creators (or financiers) have a Ubermensh complex, then one should not be surprised if AI becomes a subtle and manipulative social engineering and propaganda machine. Something that would cause even Orwell and Aldous Huxley to loose sleep... A Big Brother with VERY good marketing.
January 6, 2022
Actualitatea și plaja largă de idei pe care Wiener le atinge în această carte scurtă sînt fascinante. Ea este, într-adevăr, profetică pe alocuri, dar și echilibrată și îndrăzneață, mînată de curajul și onestitatea specifice științei.
„Spiritul în care urmează să fie elaborat [eseul] este acela al sălii de operații, și nu al privegherii cu lacrimi în ochi a unui cadavru. Ipocrizia nu își are locul aici -- ba chiar este o fărădelege, precum erau manierele unui medic elegant din secolul trecut în preajma pacienților săi, cu redingota lui neagră și cu acele de seringă ascunse în reverul de mătase al hainei.“
Mi-aș fi dorit ca această carte să fie mult mai lungă și mai detaliată, pentru că în alcătuirea curentă, deranjează ușor capitolele foarte tehnice puse laolaltă cu prezentările foarte populare și pozițiile filosofice. Traducerea se simte cam nenaturală pe alocuri, dar, desigur, nu este vina autorului.
În total, o carte în primul rînd importantă, dar și echlibrată, între îndrăzneală și pragmatism, ca urmare a excelentei minți a autorului.
„Spiritul în care urmează să fie elaborat [eseul] este acela al sălii de operații, și nu al privegherii cu lacrimi în ochi a unui cadavru. Ipocrizia nu își are locul aici -- ba chiar este o fărădelege, precum erau manierele unui medic elegant din secolul trecut în preajma pacienților săi, cu redingota lui neagră și cu acele de seringă ascunse în reverul de mătase al hainei.“
Mi-aș fi dorit ca această carte să fie mult mai lungă și mai detaliată, pentru că în alcătuirea curentă, deranjează ușor capitolele foarte tehnice puse laolaltă cu prezentările foarte populare și pozițiile filosofice. Traducerea se simte cam nenaturală pe alocuri, dar, desigur, nu este vina autorului.
În total, o carte în primul rînd importantă, dar și echlibrată, între îndrăzneală și pragmatism, ca urmare a excelentei minți a autorului.
November 26, 2020
"Religia, orice am înțelege sub acest nume, seamănă adeseori cu o cameră de zi a unei case de la țară din New England, cu jaluzele trase și flori de ceară sub un clopot de sticlă pe șemineu, cu portretul bunicului așezat pe un șevalet înconjurat de rogoz aurit și cu un armoniu făcut din nuc negru, la care se cântă doar la nunți și înmormântări. Sau am putea spune că religia este echivalentul moral al unui dric napolitan, una dintre acele trăsuri regale negre, cu geamuri de sticlă, trasă de armăsari cu coamă neagră care proclamă până și în moarte statutul social al defunctului ori aspirația către acesta. Religia este un subiect serios pe care trebuie să îl delimităm foarte clar de orice considerente personale, mai puțin semnificative decât religia însăși."
January 19, 2022
'Man and machine, keep yourself clean, or be a has-been, like a dinosaur." in this posthumously published collection of essays Norbert Wiener, father of cybernetics, cleverly explores the ability of humans to replicate themselves into machines and as machines, thus prophesying the birth of both artificial intelligence and robots. But, is this a god-like or devil-like gift. Most intriguing are Winer's ruminations on "Von Neumann machines", i.e. machines that can reproduce copies of themselves forever. They might allow us to reach distant stars or replace us as baby-makers. Beware, your computer might swallow you!
June 19, 2023
Norbert Wiener fue un genio, que con 18 años ya logró un doctorado en Lógica por la universidad de Cambridge. Es uno de los Pioneros, con mayúsculas, en muchos de los debates sobre la tecnología que tenemos estos días. En este caso, la cibernética, y la relación entre el hombre y la máquina.
Si bien el texto es extremadamente árido y muy fundamentado en filosofía, hay que reconocerle a este gran autor sus aportaciones e ideas, que aún a día de hoy siguen vigentes. Quizás sea más cómodo y eficaz leer sobre las ideas de este autor, más que leer directamente sus ideas. A fin de cuentas, la obra está redactada en 1964, y se nota el salto tecnológico de entonces a aquí.
Si bien el texto es extremadamente árido y muy fundamentado en filosofía, hay que reconocerle a este gran autor sus aportaciones e ideas, que aún a día de hoy siguen vigentes. Quizás sea más cómodo y eficaz leer sobre las ideas de este autor, más que leer directamente sus ideas. A fin de cuentas, la obra está redactada en 1964, y se nota el salto tecnológico de entonces a aquí.
June 14, 2024
Hay muchas preocupaciones vigentes incluso en nuestros días. Quizás no hay un hilo muy coherente entre todos los capítulos, pero tiene unos argumentos muy interesantes sobre la reproducción de las máquinas en otras maquinas a imagen y semejanza, sobre la ética aplicada a la creación de estas, sobre el contexto social y económico, entre otras cosas. Es ameno a pesar de tener algunos párrafos más fáciles de entender para ingenieros o lectores expertos. Pero en general las ideas son lo suficientemente claras.
June 14, 2017
It's very strange to read this book and remember it was written more than 50 years ago. It deals with exactly the same questions on the tip of the tongue of society right now. It's full of insightful, but somewhat ignorant ideas (from the perspective of the present day).
Apart from a pretty racist little nugget at the very end (I think? It's hard to tell), it's an important book to look back on what the past thought of the future.
Apart from a pretty racist little nugget at the very end (I think? It's hard to tell), it's an important book to look back on what the past thought of the future.
October 9, 2023
Highlights:
* An analog electronic circuit that can perform "self-replication". I don't understand it, but it uses some kind of shot-noise and Gabor's "Electronic Inventions and Civilization".
Probably it's not interesting nowadays, since it's so much easier to do self-replication in discrete signals in discrete electronic circuits -- that is, quines on digital computers.
Well, it's Weiner. You know he is all about analog electromechanical devices...
* Early statement of AI alignment.
* An analog electronic circuit that can perform "self-replication". I don't understand it, but it uses some kind of shot-noise and Gabor's "Electronic Inventions and Civilization".
Probably it's not interesting nowadays, since it's so much easier to do self-replication in discrete signals in discrete electronic circuits -- that is, quines on digital computers.
Well, it's Weiner. You know he is all about analog electromechanical devices...
* Early statement of AI alignment.
June 28, 2017
This little essay compilation is a wonderful thought-provoking read, especially if you keep in mind that it was written 50 years ago - could easily be a Wired article from last week. It is a bit more hectic than, say "Cybernetics", and does not contain any mathematical proof (as a choice), thus fits to the less-knowledgeable reader as well.
July 30, 2020
Hoy en día quizás notes demasiado la vejez del libro. Sin embargo cada capítulo da mucho que pensar y es una escalofriante predicción a los problemas de esta década y de las que vendrán.
March 23, 2025
Cybernetics!
April 29, 2025
Just as it starts to get interesting it ends too soon!
Read
December 27, 2015In a little Thai Buddhist tract about the Kalama Sutta, how to deal with an overabundance of options, I read a line about computers. That is, though they are powerful, the mind of the designers of the gadgets/tools/programs is that which sets the intention of the device/program's interaction within and between the beings using and/or used by it. Since these minds aren't necessarily held to any standard of enlightenment or even humanistic morals, the tract advises: "computer's shouldn't be worshiped so much."
In this book, the only Norbert Wiener text I've read, I was a bit surprised to find a similar sentiment where he criticizes "gadget worshippers" (53) for not taking into account unforseen consequences of technological "magic." Reading it with a critical eye on motivation, as I watch the world be further transformed by tech development, including my home city of Seattle being completely remade into new temples of worship for The Code, its acolytes with their heads in the cloud. He seems to be aware of how AI will probably develop, and possibly is a bit weary of possibilities, but not altogether against them or for them. Instead he points out how the religious (and I'd say, nonsecular humanist) criticism and fear of AI and robotic development is founded, and explains in detail how machines can reproduce themselves.
The motive for the creation of machines and AI may not be on the evil side of the dualistic coin. The argument i read in this text is that doomsday weaponry is the real evil and mechanistic complication and development to the point of AI and self-organizing system is a step in evolutionary curiosity and natural human ingenuity. Reading this in the period of ubiquitous computing and Phillip K. Dick shaped robots making jokes about putting humans in zoos, I still think that creation of complex tools and even other beings isn't scary, it's strong vortexes of capital and power that encourages the direction of such development. The vectors of such development are still influenced by corporate agendas, and even though people like Wiener may have chose not to emphasize the control aspect of cybernetics as much as the systemic efficiency, I'm witnessing a magnetism to develop a future where the minds of the few directly affect the lives of the many, and all systems of the earth are put under concrete (for as long as you can keep them down: a biologist friend of mine saw an abandoned highway completely destroyed by trees growing through it because it was easier for them to grow there than in the thicket of roots). I would emphasize that through the other force I'm seeing arising, involving play, creation for curiosity and symbiogenesis of nonanthropocentric life systems, the tools and epistemology of cybernetics can be used to benefit, but if we keep our underlying metaphors of control and military-industrial complex phrasing like Wiener and many authors of programming manuals seem have as their psyhophysical OSes, we're going to fail and make the world even more damaged; I have a hard time seeing any other future within these conditions.
Anyways, I'm editorializing. I was actually expecting to read Norbert Wiener as being a way worse person, but besides the uncomfortable references to Hitler and Eichmann and the sketchy red black and white cover inciting paranoia about the fascist ties to futurism, I feel that Wiener was acting based on a type of passionate invention. It also made me wonder how the discussion of mechanical development vs religious/humanistic beliefs has developed in since the 60s when this was written. There seems to be a polarization still, with people mostly leaning towards either technological saviorism or total back-to-nature neopioneerism that I see in America at least, which could ironically destroy the forest just as bad, as Alaska's gentrification and development encouraged by TV shows like "Alaska: The Final Frontier" seem to encourage using the guise of naturalism. A magazine display painted this picture out very nicely to me: the cover of Wired showed Jerry Seinfeld (upper class celeb) wearing Google Glass, propped up on the rack next to American Pioneer magazine with a drawing of the archetype of working class masculinity, a coon-skin hat wearing hunter perfectly capable of self-sustaining in the (hard to find) wilderness.
The title of this book implies this continuing conversation: what are the intersections between what may control us and/or influence us, human control and/or influence over other life, and the patterns we base these actions on such as industry and market capitalism or free market open source type development? There are many voices to listen to along these lines, and not one in particular I feel is worthy of worship.
In this book, the only Norbert Wiener text I've read, I was a bit surprised to find a similar sentiment where he criticizes "gadget worshippers" (53) for not taking into account unforseen consequences of technological "magic." Reading it with a critical eye on motivation, as I watch the world be further transformed by tech development, including my home city of Seattle being completely remade into new temples of worship for The Code, its acolytes with their heads in the cloud. He seems to be aware of how AI will probably develop, and possibly is a bit weary of possibilities, but not altogether against them or for them. Instead he points out how the religious (and I'd say, nonsecular humanist) criticism and fear of AI and robotic development is founded, and explains in detail how machines can reproduce themselves.
The motive for the creation of machines and AI may not be on the evil side of the dualistic coin. The argument i read in this text is that doomsday weaponry is the real evil and mechanistic complication and development to the point of AI and self-organizing system is a step in evolutionary curiosity and natural human ingenuity. Reading this in the period of ubiquitous computing and Phillip K. Dick shaped robots making jokes about putting humans in zoos, I still think that creation of complex tools and even other beings isn't scary, it's strong vortexes of capital and power that encourages the direction of such development. The vectors of such development are still influenced by corporate agendas, and even though people like Wiener may have chose not to emphasize the control aspect of cybernetics as much as the systemic efficiency, I'm witnessing a magnetism to develop a future where the minds of the few directly affect the lives of the many, and all systems of the earth are put under concrete (for as long as you can keep them down: a biologist friend of mine saw an abandoned highway completely destroyed by trees growing through it because it was easier for them to grow there than in the thicket of roots). I would emphasize that through the other force I'm seeing arising, involving play, creation for curiosity and symbiogenesis of nonanthropocentric life systems, the tools and epistemology of cybernetics can be used to benefit, but if we keep our underlying metaphors of control and military-industrial complex phrasing like Wiener and many authors of programming manuals seem have as their psyhophysical OSes, we're going to fail and make the world even more damaged; I have a hard time seeing any other future within these conditions.
Anyways, I'm editorializing. I was actually expecting to read Norbert Wiener as being a way worse person, but besides the uncomfortable references to Hitler and Eichmann and the sketchy red black and white cover inciting paranoia about the fascist ties to futurism, I feel that Wiener was acting based on a type of passionate invention. It also made me wonder how the discussion of mechanical development vs religious/humanistic beliefs has developed in since the 60s when this was written. There seems to be a polarization still, with people mostly leaning towards either technological saviorism or total back-to-nature neopioneerism that I see in America at least, which could ironically destroy the forest just as bad, as Alaska's gentrification and development encouraged by TV shows like "Alaska: The Final Frontier" seem to encourage using the guise of naturalism. A magazine display painted this picture out very nicely to me: the cover of Wired showed Jerry Seinfeld (upper class celeb) wearing Google Glass, propped up on the rack next to American Pioneer magazine with a drawing of the archetype of working class masculinity, a coon-skin hat wearing hunter perfectly capable of self-sustaining in the (hard to find) wilderness.
The title of this book implies this continuing conversation: what are the intersections between what may control us and/or influence us, human control and/or influence over other life, and the patterns we base these actions on such as industry and market capitalism or free market open source type development? There are many voices to listen to along these lines, and not one in particular I feel is worthy of worship.
December 16, 2020
Norbert Wiener wrote these essays for the interested layman shortly before his unexpected death in his seventieth year. It was issued posthumously and seems like his testament. Wiener was one of the towering pioneers of what is now known as computer science. He coined the term cybernetics. Beyond that, he was one of those rare scientific innovators concerned about his breakthroughs' social and ethical implications.
Reading this book now, more than a half-century after it came out, offers an exciting window into the time when the potential of "learning machines" was just beginning to be evident. One of the examples Wiener uses is a machine programmed to play checkers that had been able to learn from each game it played and had reached the point where it would never lose. His expectation that the same would happen with a chess-playing machine took a bit longer than the ten years he expected, though.
Wiener had presented the ideas in these essays in various settings. His assertion that our relation to machines that learn and reproduce themselves is comparable to the traditional notion of God's relation to man seemed blasphemous to some listeners at the time. For some, the indignation was on religious grounds; for others (biologists), the notion of machines made of inorganic matter could be compared to biological life-forms seemed heretical.
There is little wasted verbiage in this book. At times, it is aphoristic. I liked his reworking of the words of Christ: "Render unto man the things which are man's and unto the computer the things which are the computer's." Of course, this is easier said than put into practice. Many of his innovations led to leaps in productivity, but he was bothered by the human cost of workers made redundant by automation, a problem that remains with us.
I especially enjoyed Wiener's account of an essay, "Science and Society," that he had published in a Soviet academic journal a few years earlier. He seemed amused, but not surprised, that the same number of the journal ran a rebuttal—longer than his essay—from an orthodox Marxist standpoint. He suggested that, had he published it in the West instead, it would have been rebutted in the name of free enterprise. His point had been that science made an important contribution to the homeostasis (balance) of the community, yet its contribution had to be assessed anew every generation or so. He was neither anti-Marxist nor anti-Capitalist, Wiener maintained, but anti-rigidity.
Given that stance, Wiener might be skeptical of a reader coming to his book two generations after publication. But then again, his point was not that we should throw out scientific contributions after twenty-years, but that they should be reassessed. I think a reassessment of Wiener's contribution, on the evidence of this slim book, is that we continue to need scientists who are humane while at the same time unafraid to challenge old orthodoxies.
Reading this book now, more than a half-century after it came out, offers an exciting window into the time when the potential of "learning machines" was just beginning to be evident. One of the examples Wiener uses is a machine programmed to play checkers that had been able to learn from each game it played and had reached the point where it would never lose. His expectation that the same would happen with a chess-playing machine took a bit longer than the ten years he expected, though.
Wiener had presented the ideas in these essays in various settings. His assertion that our relation to machines that learn and reproduce themselves is comparable to the traditional notion of God's relation to man seemed blasphemous to some listeners at the time. For some, the indignation was on religious grounds; for others (biologists), the notion of machines made of inorganic matter could be compared to biological life-forms seemed heretical.
There is little wasted verbiage in this book. At times, it is aphoristic. I liked his reworking of the words of Christ: "Render unto man the things which are man's and unto the computer the things which are the computer's." Of course, this is easier said than put into practice. Many of his innovations led to leaps in productivity, but he was bothered by the human cost of workers made redundant by automation, a problem that remains with us.
I especially enjoyed Wiener's account of an essay, "Science and Society," that he had published in a Soviet academic journal a few years earlier. He seemed amused, but not surprised, that the same number of the journal ran a rebuttal—longer than his essay—from an orthodox Marxist standpoint. He suggested that, had he published it in the West instead, it would have been rebutted in the name of free enterprise. His point had been that science made an important contribution to the homeostasis (balance) of the community, yet its contribution had to be assessed anew every generation or so. He was neither anti-Marxist nor anti-Capitalist, Wiener maintained, but anti-rigidity.
Given that stance, Wiener might be skeptical of a reader coming to his book two generations after publication. But then again, his point was not that we should throw out scientific contributions after twenty-years, but that they should be reassessed. I think a reassessment of Wiener's contribution, on the evidence of this slim book, is that we continue to need scientists who are humane while at the same time unafraid to challenge old orthodoxies.
November 22, 2012
In reviewing this book I feel a little like Icarus. I feel afraid to fly to close to the sun of Norbert Wiener's genius, herein exposed full force. For example, have you ever been asked the chicken and egg question? Norbert Wiener answers thusly, "a hen is merely an egg's way of making another egg.." Contrast this with "The Selfish Gene" which took Richard Dawkins a whole book to say. (See my review of this book elsewhere at Amazon.com.)
The subtitle sets forth, in brilliant compaction, the theme of this essentially extended essay: "A Comment on Certain Points Where Cybernetics Impinges on Relgion."
First, Wiener considers machines which learn.
Next, Wiener considers machines which reproduce themselves.
Wiener's work anticipates the entire modern field of bioethics. As Wiener says in his final chapter, "I have now run through a number of essays that are united by covering the entire theme of creative activity, from God to the machine, under one set of concepts. The machine, as I have already said is the modern counterpart of the Golem of the Rabbi of Prague." If you are concerned about cloning, or man playing God, I urge you to buy and study this book.
The subtitle sets forth, in brilliant compaction, the theme of this essentially extended essay: "A Comment on Certain Points Where Cybernetics Impinges on Relgion."
First, Wiener considers machines which learn.
Next, Wiener considers machines which reproduce themselves.
Wiener's work anticipates the entire modern field of bioethics. As Wiener says in his final chapter, "I have now run through a number of essays that are united by covering the entire theme of creative activity, from God to the machine, under one set of concepts. The machine, as I have already said is the modern counterpart of the Golem of the Rabbi of Prague." If you are concerned about cloning, or man playing God, I urge you to buy and study this book.
September 24, 2013
Para darnos una idea de cómo avanza el mundo podemos tomar como ejemplo esta maravillosa obra "God & Golem Inc." del padre de la cibernética Norbert Wiener quien plantea tres problemas éticos que eran (y siguen siendo) fundamentales en el desarrollo de tecnología:
1. Las máquinas que son capaces de aprender.
2. Las máquinas que pueden reproducirse.
3. La sincronización entre máquina y persona.
La lectura aborda estos temas dentro de su contexto histórico (1963) y es interesante ver como lo que en ese momento fue enunciado como una [lejana] posibilidad es hoy en día una realidad.
Las técnicas modernas de aprendizaje de máquina, procesamiento de conjuntos gigantes de datos, aplicaciones como traducción automática o sistemas expertos para diagnóstico entre otros son mencionadas.
Sin embargo, supongo que por el carácter posmoderno del hombre actual, los sistemas se han desarrollado sin gran conflicto ético.
Esperemos que la máquina que oprimiría el proverbial botón rojo que iniciará la tercera guerra mundial, aún no haya sido inventada.
1. Las máquinas que son capaces de aprender.
2. Las máquinas que pueden reproducirse.
3. La sincronización entre máquina y persona.
La lectura aborda estos temas dentro de su contexto histórico (1963) y es interesante ver como lo que en ese momento fue enunciado como una [lejana] posibilidad es hoy en día una realidad.
Las técnicas modernas de aprendizaje de máquina, procesamiento de conjuntos gigantes de datos, aplicaciones como traducción automática o sistemas expertos para diagnóstico entre otros son mencionadas.
Sin embargo, supongo que por el carácter posmoderno del hombre actual, los sistemas se han desarrollado sin gran conflicto ético.
Esperemos que la máquina que oprimiría el proverbial botón rojo que iniciará la tercera guerra mundial, aún no haya sido inventada.
August 7, 2025
Traducerea română este foarte slabă, cu multe greșeli de topică și ortografie; cu toate acestea, cartea pare a fi o referință de primă mână pentru a înțelege felul în care se „reproduc” mașinile.
Este cea mai simplă și elegantă cale pentru a înțelege semnificația conceptului de machine learning.
Ce ar fi de reținut:
În esență, Machine Learning (ML) se bazează pe crearea de modele matematice care pot învăța din date, fără a fi explicit programate pentru fiecare sarcină. Această capacitate de auto-îmbunătățire și adaptare pune sub semnul întrebării concepte tradiționale despre creație, control și autonomie.
Sistemele de ML, prin capacitatea lor de a "învăța" din date și de a lua decizii fără intervenție umană directă, ridică întrebări fundamentale despre controlul uman asupra tehnologiei și despre limitele autonomiei inteligenței artificiale.
În ce măsură sunt creatorii de sisteme ML responsabili pentru acțiunile acestora? Cum putem asigura că sistemele de ML respectă principii etice, mai ales când "învață" din date care pot fi părtinitoare sau incomplete?
Este cea mai simplă și elegantă cale pentru a înțelege semnificația conceptului de machine learning.
Ce ar fi de reținut:
În esență, Machine Learning (ML) se bazează pe crearea de modele matematice care pot învăța din date, fără a fi explicit programate pentru fiecare sarcină. Această capacitate de auto-îmbunătățire și adaptare pune sub semnul întrebării concepte tradiționale despre creație, control și autonomie.
Sistemele de ML, prin capacitatea lor de a "învăța" din date și de a lua decizii fără intervenție umană directă, ridică întrebări fundamentale despre controlul uman asupra tehnologiei și despre limitele autonomiei inteligenței artificiale.
În ce măsură sunt creatorii de sisteme ML responsabili pentru acțiunile acestora? Cum putem asigura că sistemele de ML respectă principii etice, mai ales când "învață" din date care pot fi părtinitoare sau incomplete?
December 21, 2019
This is a book about the ethic implications of Machine Learning... written in *1964*
"The magic of automation, and in particular the magic of an automatization in which the devices learn, may be expected to be similarly literal minded. If you are playing a game according to certain rules and set the playing-machine to play for victory, you will get victory if you get anything at all, and the machine will not pay the slightest attention to any consideration except victory according to the rules. If you are playing a war game with a certain conventional interpretation of victory, victory will be the goal at any cost, even that of the extermination of your own side, unless this condition of survival is explicitly contained in the definition of victory according to which you program the machine."
"The magic of automation, and in particular the magic of an automatization in which the devices learn, may be expected to be similarly literal minded. If you are playing a game according to certain rules and set the playing-machine to play for victory, you will get victory if you get anything at all, and the machine will not pay the slightest attention to any consideration except victory according to the rules. If you are playing a war game with a certain conventional interpretation of victory, victory will be the goal at any cost, even that of the extermination of your own side, unless this condition of survival is explicitly contained in the definition of victory according to which you program the machine."
Read
February 8, 2024Menos fecundo, mas especulativo. Las implicaciones éticas de la transmisión de información invariablemente serán imprecisas aunque se pretendan morales debido a que a) son sugerencias o b) son ordenes que infieren en nuestros valores para a) resonar o b) formarlos. Por tanto el valor de la información decae por la intención de la inferencia sea ética y valiosa.
La capacidad de Norbert Wiener es epistemológica no moral, una exposición de información plena como sus anteriores ensayos se echan de menos aquí queda sesgado a voluntad por querer eximir.
La capacidad de Norbert Wiener es epistemológica no moral, una exposición de información plena como sus anteriores ensayos se echan de menos aquí queda sesgado a voluntad por querer eximir.
March 17, 2009
I am a huge Norbert Wiener fan and even went through a period of carrying a book of his around as a safety blanket. The endeavor of this book and the sparks off it are reason enough to own it, as far as I'm concerned. That said, I find that the work feels truncated: it ends too soon and does not synthesize and solidify its conclusions in Weiner's usual very clear and characterful style. It's as though he just stopped writing it.
December 8, 2012
The author emphasizes more on the human-machine relationship and speaks about the posiblity of self-learning,self-reproducing machines and other cybernetic related stuff.
Some things are obsolate and what you can find in this book you can find in most of the new popular science books - those including Artificial Inteligence topics.
Some things are obsolate and what you can find in this book you can find in most of the new popular science books - those including Artificial Inteligence topics.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 33 reviews