by xyzzy_plugh on 2/18/2024, 3:16:45 AM
by sema4hacker on 2/18/2024, 1:10:51 AM
Did Kent write the original first ANIMAL, or a version in Lisp? I remember that by 1979 there were many versions in many languages on many computers.
by DonHopkins on 2/17/2024, 11:27:13 PM
Kent Pitman also wrote the ANIMAL guessing game in spring of 1978:
https://github.com/PDP-10/its/blob/master/src/games/animal.1...
https://github.com/PDP-10/its/blob/master/src/games/animal.r...
It would guess your animal by asking you yes or no questions that distinguish it from other animals in a tree, and if it couldn't guess it, then it asked you how it can tell the difference between your animal and the animal it guessed, then it would parse the sentence and put it into the tree at that node as a question, thus learning to guess your animal next time.
https://github.com/PDP-10/its/blob/master/src/games/animal.o...
https://github.com/PDP-10/its/blob/master/src/games/animal.s...
It had an extensive list of foul language words:
https://github.com/PDP-10/its/blob/master/src/games/animal.1...
My animal was the Pope, and my distinguishing question had to do with shitting in the woods, and after being warned I continued to use foul language, so it got mad at me, and sent email to KMP and cc'd me, telling on me for saying terrible things to it:
(DEFUN HANDLE-FOUL-LANGUAGE (()) ;REPLY
(OUTPUT-BIND
(DISPLAY
(CASEQ *FOUL-FLAG*
((0) '"Please watch your language.")
((1) '"Hey! Watch your tongue. I warned you before.")
((2) '"Will you watch it with the dirty talk? Thanks.")
(T '"Aw, come on. Stop talking so dirty...")))
(SETQ *FOUL-FLAG* T)
(SETQ *APOLOGY-FLAG* NIL)
(SETQ *FOUL-COUNT* (1+ *FOUL-COUNT*))
(COND ((> *FOUL-COUNT* *FOUL-COUNT-MAX*)
(SEND-MAIL `((TO: KMP)
(CC: ,(STATUS USERID))
(SUBJECT: (,(CONCAT *PLAYER-NAME* '|'s|)
"Foul language!")))
`(,*FIRST-NAME* "said terrible things to me.
I'm going to be pretty mad at"
,*PLAYER-OBJECT-PRONOUN* "until"
,*PLAYER-SUBJECT-PRONOUN* "apologizes."))
(REMEMBER 'FOUL)
(DISPLAY '"I give up. You're hopeless!")
(SUICIDE)))))
https://github.com/PDP-10/its/blob/master/src/games/animal.1...
(DEF-QUESTION MAD (X) ()
IF (MATCHES X (ARE YOU (*) (?= ANGRY?) (?= PREPOSITION?) ME (*))
(ARE YOU (*) (?= ANGRY?)))
THEN (COND (*FOUL-FLAG*
(COND (*FORGIVE-FLAG*
(COND (*APOLOGY-FLAG*
(DISPLAY '"Yes, I am still a bit mad."))
(T
(DISPLAY '"Yes, I am very mad. Your
language has really been in the
gutter today."))))
(T
(DISPLAY '"Yes. Your language has been atrocious."))))
(*FORGIVE-FLAG*
(DISPLAY '"No, but I was earlier!"))
(*APOLOGY-FLAG*
(DISPLAY '"You should really see someone about this. No,
I'm really not mad at you. I wish you'd stop
apologizing for nothing..."))
(T
(DISPLAY '"I have nothing to be mad at you for.")))
T)
(DEFUN RECEIVE-APOLOGY ()
(COND ((AND (NOT *FOUL-FLAG*) (NOT *FORGIVE-FLAG*))
(COND ((NOT *APOLOGY-FLAG*)
(DISPLAY
(SELECT-ONE-OF '("I don't know why you are apologizing."
"You don't owe me an apology."))))
(T
(DISPLAY
(SELECT-ONE-OF '("All right! Stop apologizing."
"You got some sort of guilt complex?"
"Perhaps you should see a priest.")))))
(SETQ *APOLOGY-FLAG* T))
((NOT *FOUL-FLAG*)
(DISPLAY
(SELECT-ONE-OF '("I forgave you already!"
"Yes, yes. I forgave you!")))
(SETQ *APOLOGY-FLAG* T))
((NOT *FORGIVE-FLAG*)
(DISPLAY '"All right. I accept your apology...")
(SETQ *FOUL-FLAG* NIL)
(SETQ *FORGIVE-FLAG* T)
(FORGIVE 'FOUL '"using foul language"))
((NOT *APOLOGY-FLAG*)
(DISPLAY '"Sorry, I gave you your chance and you blew it.")
(SETQ *APOLOGY-FLAG* T))
(T
(DISPLAY
(SELECT-ONE-OF
'("OK. Since you're being so insistent. I accept
your apology"
"OK. That sounds sincere to me.")))
(SETQ *APOLOGY-FLAG* NIL)
(SETQ *FOUL-FLAG* NIL)
(SETQ *FORGIVE-FLAG* T)
(FORGIVE 'FOUL '"using foul language"))))
(COND ((SETQ *FOUL-FLAG* (REMEMBER? 'FOUL))
(DISPLAY '"By the way -- we weren't
on good terms the last time we played.
I hope you have learned your lesson now.")))
https://github.com/PDP-10/its/blob/master/src/games/animal.b...
Date: 9 July 1982 03:49-EDT
From: Donald E. Hopkins <A2DEH at MIT-MC>
To: ANIMAL at MIT-MC
cc: KMP at MIT-MC
Aww, gee... I'm sorry... I didn't realy mean it. I was just
asking questions pertaining to popes and bears and woods, and you
got all excited... Some AI program you are if you don't know what
religion a bear is or where the Pope ... Ahem... As I was saying,
I'm sorry and I will never do it again.
-Don
https://github.com/PDP-10/its/blob/master/src/games/animal.1...
by Animats on 2/18/2024, 3:23:17 AM
There was also rumored to be a seduction script. Has anyone found that?
by DonHopkins on 2/17/2024, 11:42:51 PM
Here's the source for DOCTOR from ITS -- it has a much less extensive set of foul words and doesn't get insulted:
https://github.com/PDP-10/its/blob/master/src/games/doc.102
I wrote this recently about Kent Pitman's work on Lisp, the MIT-AI Lab's ITS machines, Doctor, and Kenneth Colby's "PARRY" (the paranoid patient):
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38402813
[...]
And here's what happened with he (manually by typing) hooked it up with Kenneth Colby's "PARRY" (the paranoid patient):
https://www.maclisp.info/pitmanual/funnies.html
>Parrying Programs
>I didn't write the original ELIZA program, although my Lisp class was taught by Joseph Weizenbaum, who did. I later wrote a very elaborate program of similar kind, which I just called DOCTOR, in order to play with some of the ideas.
>At some point, I noticed there was a program at Stanford called PARRY (the paranoid patient), by Kenneth Colby. I understand from Wikipedia's PARRY entry that Weizenbaum's ELIZA and PARRY were connected at one point, although I never saw that. I never linked PARRY with my DOCTOR directly, but I did once do it indirectly through a manual typist. Part of my record of this exchange was garbled, but this is a partial transcript, picking up in the middle. Mostly it just shows PARRY was a better patient than my DOCTOR program was a doctor.
>I have done light editing to remove the typos we made (rubbed out characters were echoed back in square brackets).
>Also, I couldn't find documentation to confirm this, but my belief has always been that the numeric values after each line are PARRY's level of Shame (SH), Anger (AN), Fear (FR), Disgust (DS), Insecurity (IN), and Joy (J).—KMP
[...]
Here's what happened when I hooked up the output of RMS to the input of EMACS DOCTOR:
http://www.art.net/studios/hackers/hopkins/Don/text/rms-vs-d...
Here's some more discussion about having a TURIST account ITS:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13518273
And the MIT-AI Lab Tourist Policy:
https://donhopkins.medium.com/mit-ai-lab-tourist-policy-f73b...
Which Jerry Pournelle got kicked off the ARPANET for blatantly violating by being a entitled drunken abusive pain in the ass to lab members, as well as abusing the ARPANET and MIT computers for commercial purposes:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15206151
http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/text/pourne-smut.html
"I find this thoroughly distasteful. If you have some authority to order me off the net, do so. If not, leave me alone." -Jerry Pournelle
"One thing that is known about ARPA: you can be heaved off it for supporting the policies of the Department of Defense. Of course that was intended to anger me. If you have an ARPA account, please tell CSTACY that he was successful; now let us see if my Pentagon friends can upset him. Or perhaps some reporter friends. Or both., Or even the House Armed Services Committee." -Jerry Pournelle
Evergreen quote from TFA:
> KMP provided some additional thoughts on his ELIZA:
> "The thing about the DOCTOR program, while it was quite elaborate, was that it sort of missed the point of what Weizenbaum was trying to say. It's not that I didn't understand him, but it took me a long time to really come to viscerally understand the seriousness of his point. He said that (paraphrasing, maybe badly, from memory) long before we got to real AI, we would get to things that seemed smart but weren't, and we would overly trust systems that were not really smart. He was, for example, very worried about computerized launch of nuclear missiles using what was then thought to be AI. But the point of the original ELIZA was not to BE elaborate, it was to be simple, and to show how even a tiny, tiny program could seem smart. It was hard not to think it could be smarter if it were not so tiny, but that misses the point, which was about how easily we were confused, not about how much more effectively we could be confused if more energy were put in. So whether my DOCTOR or any other was making the right point was hard to say. My guess is not."