[johann28]

ML was there but at least when I started learning about these things around 8 years ago, the label "AI" was mostly used for symbolic stuff. Courses named "AI" taught from the Russell-Norvig book. Things like resolution, planning in the block world, heuristic graph search, min-max trees, etc. ML existed but it wasn't really under the label of "AI" as far as I can remember. I think it's something of a marketing term that big companies like Google and Facebook reintroduced due to the scifi connotations. But that's just my guess.

[_delirium]

I can see that for intro courses, especially because of the book, though it varies a lot by school and instructor. On the research side it's been a big part of the field, though. The proceedings of a big conference like AAAI [1] are a decent proxy for what researchers consider "AI", and ML has been pretty well represented there for a while.

[1] http://www.aaai.org/Library/AAAI/aaai-library.php

[auvrw]

> I think it's something of a marketing term

you're not alone in thinking so

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10483846

i get the impression that terminology bifurcated into "AI" and "cognitive science" around the time Marr published Vision in the 80's.

quibbles and q-bits aside, i was glad to see the announcement from the perspective of a if-not-free-then-at-least-probably-open-source-ish software appreciator.