It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Title: Neural Network on a Commodore 64
Author: John Walker
Language: C64 BASIC
Year of development:1987
Software/hardware requirements: Commodore 64 and C64 BASIC
While searching for artificial intelligence that predated the 2000s, I stumbled upon John Walker's blog and found this blogpost on BrainSim. It is a program written in 1987 in less than 250 lines of BASIC to implement a neuron network. The program can train the computer to memorize the patterns of three alphabet letters. It is limited to three because of limited memory capacity. The method to use neuron cells as on and off switches was proposed in the 50s. This paper written by Frank Rosenblatt is a reference for the method. I haven't read the paper at all. I took an applied machine learning class here in CU, a picture of the "perceptron", referring to the neural switch, was in the slides. The class was more technical than investigating the algorithm as a historical artefact, so I looked up the paper outside of class. The extent of what I digested the mechanism is that our neurons receive a stimulus, as the stimulus increases over a threshold, it makes a reaction, and transmits the stimulus onto to other neurons. In the program we are looking at in this thread, there are two layers of neurons. The network is visualized in the blog post in detail. The author also explained how it was implemented (a character is an array of size 42, as the character field is 6 by 7).
I was fascinated by this program. As said in the introduction I am a grad assistant working in the Media Archaeology Lab. Our volunteer helped me to "flash" the program onto a floppy disk and we were playing with it on the lab C64. What's beyond this fascination other than seeing Artificial Intelligence running on a C64? These are my questions open for criticism:
1) Can critical code studies blend in with media archaeology? Does the definition of media archaeology allow that? (I argue with a lab colleague on this). While media archaeology emphasizes the experiences interacting with media, I contend that this is a piece of code running on a media. The C64 as a computer through which the program is mediated. As we study the code, the code actualizes (is this the right word?) itself through the media of C64.
2) I also think about how @nickm defined his practice of writing BASIC poems on Apple II and C64 as platform specific. The specificity has also to do with cultural and historical sensitivity.
"I should point out, however, than many people—millions of us—first learned how to write programs like these using BASIC"
This sentiment is true for our lab community as well. Personally, I was born after the sweet spot, by the time I started to fuzz with computers, they were running on GUIs and had a less programmable interface. Other than historical sensitivity, the program presented to me a sensitivity of limit - it could train 3 letters and not more.
3) Lastly, I also want to bring in the concern of retro-fetishism. I see the risk of falling into retro-fetishism, in context of the MAL, if the program is presented in lack of critical strategies. How do you see the program be critically presented with thoughtful strategies: a good and accessible code review, demonstrations of the training process, comparison with artificial intelligence as implemented in modern platforms (ie Jupyternote book)?
I propose this thread both out of my own academic interest and context of the MAL.