Do we have enough rockets and launch pads yet?

On Feb 28, 5:05*pm, "
wrote:
On Feb 28, 2:04*pm, Eric Chomko wrote:





On Feb 28, 2:39*pm, "
wrote:

On Feb 28, 1:12*pm, Eric Chomko wrote:

On Feb 26, 2:49*pm, "
wrote:

On Feb 25, 5:18*pm, kT wrote:

I'm a FORTH programmer, I can certainly run herd on any software..

That's the first time I've heard mention of FORTH since the early
eighties, when i had responsibilty at KSC for a team of FORTH
programmers from Huntsville. Do you know if any engineers at KSC are
still using GOAL (Ground Oriented Aerospace Language)?

JTM

I learned FORTH back in the mid-80s on a DEC PDP-11. I wrote a screen
(many words).

What the hack (no pun, just a mispell I left) is GOAL?

It's a bit slow to load, but scroll about halfway down for GOAL:

http://tinyurl.com/2ppq5r

Thanks, I'll check it out.

I recall a NASA language for Expert Systems called Clips from JSC or
JPL. Not sure what ever became of it, and expert systems for that
matter...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Were those the expert systems that were more or less synonymous with
artificial intelligence?

A lot of expert system people liked to think so, but an expert system
appears more like "programmed learning" guides of the 60s and 70s
rather than something that could pass for AI.

To date, only chess algorithms can pass for anything AI-like based
upon the original goals of what AI was supposed to provide.

vaguely recall evaluating a couple of those
for NASA, now that you mention it. It wouldn't surprise me at all if
they never got off the ground.

No, CLIPS was for real. It was used at GSFC for awhile on the Spacelab
project.

Their methods of establishing data
bases were ill-defined, to say the least. Maybe 'too hopeful' better
describes that aspect of them.


Well since AI was a big deal in the 80s and 90s, it has sort of fallen
by the wayside in favor of robitics at the moment. I mean unless you
can get your AI project to actually "do" something, then what good is
it?