On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 7:10 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 8/16/2013 8:04 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 3:42 PM, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Chris de Morsella >>> <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>> When will a computer pass the Turing Test? Are we getting close? Here >>>>> is >>>>> what the CEO of Google says: “Many people in AI believe that we’re >>>>> close to >>>>> [a computer passing the Turing Test] within the next five years,” said >>>>> Eric >>>>> Schmidt, Executive Chairman, Google, speaking at The Aspen Institute on >>>>> July >>>>> 16, 2013. >>> >>> It could be. Five years ago I would have said we were a very long way >>> from >>> any computer passing the Turing Test, but then I saw Watson and its >>> incredible performance on Jeopardy. And once a true AI comes into >>> existence >>> it will turn ALL scholarly predictions about what the future will be like >>> into pure nonsense, except for the prediction that we can't make >>> predictions >>> that are worth a damn after that point. >> >> I don't really find the Turing Test that meaningful, to be honest. My >> main problem with it is that it is a test on our ability to build a >> machine that deceives humans into believing it is another human. This >> will always be a digital Frankenstein because it will not be the >> outcome of the same evolutionary context that we are. So it will have >> to pretend to care about things that it is not reasonable for it to >> care. > > > I agree, and so did Turing. He proposed the test just as a was to make a > small testable step toward intelligence - he didn't consider it at all > definitive. Interestingly the test he actually proposed was to have a man > and a computer each pretend to be a woman, and success would be for the > computer to succeed in fooling the tester as often as the man.
Two deep mysteries in a single test! Telmo. > Brent > > > >> >> I find it a much more worthwhile endeavour to create a machine that >> can understand what we mean like a human does, without the need to >> convince us that it has human emotions and so on. This machine would >> actually be _more_ useful and _more_ interesting by virtue of not >> passing the Turing test. >> >> Telmo. >> >>> John K Clark >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Everything List" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to [email protected]. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
