zlacker

> The CYC project continued for decades with a massive team of people encoding rules according to it's own complex ontology, but ultimately never met it's goals.

Cyc has been a commercial project for a long time and is still alive. The more limited Open and Research distributions have been discontinued, though.

>>dragon+(OP)
I'll admit it was news to me that Cycorp is still around! There's an interesting thread here that provides some insight from former/current employees into what they are actually doing nowadays.

>>21781597

There's also a lengthy Lex Fridman interview with Doug Lenat, from just a year ago, here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wMKoSRbGVs

It seems as if the "common sense expert system" foundation of CYC (the mostly unstated common knowledge behind all human communication) was basically completed, but what has failed to materialize is any higher level comprehensive knowledge base and reasoning system (i.e some form of AGI) based on top of this.

It's not clear from the outside whether anyone working at Cycorp still really believes there is a CYC-based path to AGI, but regardless it seems not to be something that's really being funded and worked on, and 40 years on probably fair to say it's not going to happen. It seems that Cycorp stays alive by selling the hype and winning contracts to develop domain-specific expert systems, based on the CYC methodology and toolset, that really have little reliance on the "common sense" foundations they are nominally built on top of.