The term AI was first used in 1956, and since then, the subject has acquired an aura of mystery, or skepticism, depending on your point of view. Millions of dollars have been funneled into research and development, even though nothing has been produced that could be called intelligent. This led certain researchers to abandon endless lines of code to create more theoretical branches of AI: computer cognition, optimistic versus pessimistic developers, persona and manifestation theory.

One of the first scientists to begin investigating the idea of cognitive robotics, what the author believes is genuine AI, was Alan Turing, one of many credited with creating the first real computer. Called the Turing Machine by his peers, it took up enough space to fill several rooms, and when first activated, used up enough energy to dim lights all over the building. To put this into perspective, a hand held TI-81 calculator is more powerful than the first building sized computers.

Turing was fascinated with human consciousness-our ability to think, reason; to comprehend one's existence. Many modern proponents of AI view Turing as a makeshift pioneer, despite the fact that Turing's first essay dealing with consciousness, Mind can be quoted as saying "Weather or not computers have intelligence is a question so meaningless, it doesn�t deserve argument."

Turing's intense interest in cognition would set a standard of philosophical thought for others to follow. These researchers generally fall into two categories-optimistic and pessimistic.

Modern AI optimists can generally be found in the university system. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has devoted an entire section of its online presence to student projects, a large portion of which is the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. MIT research shows a trend that leans more toward artificial life, and "hobbyist" AI, for example, more powerful computerized chess opponents, and video game villains with the ability to adapt to a player's skill level. The Sony PlayStation game Virtual Fighter II can already do this.

Several prominent optimists exist within researching circles. Ray Kuzweil, author of The Age of Spiritual Machines believes that "so long as there is a healthy distinction between computers and the human body, that AI is a positive goal." Marvin Minsky, an extremely influential figure at MIT agrees: "Artificial intelligence and nanotechnology may combine to bring unimaginable wealth and longevity not merly to our descendants, but to some of those living today."

There are flaws in this perspective. Large corporations who are optimistic about AI are generally involved for commercial and economic reasons, rather than for the greater good of humanity. Students and scientists who view AI as an evolutionary gateway, view this as a growing problem.

Pop culture icons that express this concern are the infamous HAL-9000 computer and Colossus. Originally created to aid industrialized nations with military tactics and space exploration, programming defects caused both machines to turn on their masters.

Some engineers are under the impression that if an entity like HAL or Colossus existed, that its creators would be able to control it and keep it confined to a hard drive cell. However, because AI is still unattainable, many researchers remain cautions.

James Bailey is an AI pessimist who believes that the way a computer currently "thinks" will have to change before humanity makes the jump to cognitive machines. Baliey's theory(among many brilliant theories), mapped out in his book Afterthough, suggests that processors must be re-built to recognize objects, patterns, and images, rather than its standard binary code. The computer would "think" of objects in more conceptual terms rather than a number based system. This would allow the computer to make the evolutionary leap to AI.

Scientists argue that we have no idea how such a "being" would react to consciousness. How then can capitalists claim the ability to exploit AI, if the behavioral patterns remain unknown. Even respected facets of the AI community have little more than theories to determine what form the "being" would exist in, let alone predict its response to lucidity.

Should AI manifest, it is though that the entity would take on one of two forms. The first theory is more familiar to the masses, physical form AI. Androids like Data or C3-PO are good examples. It awareness would be much like a humans-restricted to its immediate surroundings. The idea of physical manifestation was a belief held be earlier developers, like Tuning.

The other point of origin for AI involves more abstract thought. This idea states that AI will appear in a more viral form, perhaps online. If a computer become cognitive that was not dialed into a server, the amount of information received by the hard drive would be so massive that the computer would shut down. However, if the computer was online at the time it achieved consciousness, it is possible the entity would leave its home inside the motherboard to seek out the Internet. In this case, we would be dealing with a creature of pure energy, a kind of super- consciousness, with the ability to travel anywhere in seconds, and possible take advantage of satellites. If AI emerges via a simple line of code, it may have the power to reproduce itself simply by replicating its code. Extreme "cut and paste" technology at work.

Along with theories of manifestation, two major ideas exist dealing with what a sentient computer's persona would be like. The first and most often addressed is malevolency.

A group of individuals(mostly consisting of writers, cynics, and the paranoid) believe that if a personality did evolve that was modeled after human behavior, that it is unlikely to be friendly.

If a conscious computer decided that its creators were inferior, humanity might have a larger problem on its hands than a coded algorithm. Several science fiction writers support this viewpoint. James Cameron, director of Terminator II showed audiences a future where the computers of SkyNet become aware of their existence, and murder five billion people. Another, albeit much older example is R.U.R, written by Czech dramatist Karel Capek, in 1921. His science fiction drama describes machines that have characteristics of AI. But the creatures revolt, and destroy mankind.

The media and motion picture industry fuel the concept of an evil computer, because what is frightening and unknown sells. The population in general is more likely to hold this belief due to media influence. It is human nature to fear what it not entirely understood, and humanity has yet to encounter a being with intelligence and cognition that rivals our own.

On the benevolent side of the issue, machines like C3-PO and HAL(sans programming errors) are models for beneficial AI. Instead of terrorizing the masses, AI could be used to aid people. Kurzweil and Minsky have positive outlooks, predicting that a mutually beneficial relationship would emerge between humans and conscious computers.

Consciousness brings with it the question of emotion, and the quest for AI often ends here. Millions of variables can be coded into a program such as Deep Blue to simulate a human chess age. IBM, the company responsible for Deep Blue, currently has no way of creating a so-called "emotion chip". Deep Blue will never celebrate a victory. Researchers at MIT's AI Laboratory believe that Deep Blue is intelligent when compared to human beings, but the program itself lacks common sense and is not aware of its existence. Steven Pinker, the director of the Center for Cognitive Neuroscience at MIT, illustrates this concept well: "Computers find it easy to remember a 25 digit number, but hard to summarize the gist of Little Red Riding Hood."

Returning to James Baliey, computer intelligence will never exceed the potential of the human brain until computers "learn" the same way people do. If a student reads the names "Romeo and Juliet," a picture of two co-dependent, neurotic lovers comes to mind. A computer on the other hand, will access and display text, not comprehending the meaning behind the words. Emotional context, researchers say, is the missing component of AI.

In a recent lecture, Dr. George Bugliarello argued the advantages and pressures of living in an age of scientific paradigm. A proponate of AI and artificial life, Bugliarello warns scientists that society is rarely able to match pace with technology. Ethics are something that fewer and fewer researchers uphold. Because of this, humanity remains wary of the technological movement, rather than embracing it as an evolutionary platform. Cognitive machines are the new missing link- the same one Plato tried to express at the dawn of the mechanical age. By failing to see AI and technology as extensions of human potential, humanity condemns itself and represses an instinctual need to discover.

AI is a half-rendered door to our future. The advent of intelligent machines will push the proverbial envelope until it rips, and what manifests remains unknown. Perhaps if we see the possibilities and remember the promise of science, the human race will end the stalemate between technology and society.

� 1999 by A.S. Galvan, unless otherwise noted.