Turing Test: a proposed test of a computer's ability to think, requiring that the covert substitution of the computer for one of the participants in a keyboard and screen dialogue should be undetectable by the remaining human participant. (source)
While many accept that the Turing Test tests AI, others go further and suppose that if a machine passes the test to a very limited degree, that fact proves that the machine can think.
I think that the first conclusion is somewhat plausible. That, in other words, passing the Turing Test shows that artificial intelligence may have been achieved.
As for whether artificial intelligence implies thinking, I'm really unsure.
In a sense, the very term "artificial" implies a level of fraudulence. If I give you a meatloaf dinner which you enjoy thinking its real meat, but I don't tell you that the meatloaf you're eating was manufactured in a laboratory, is that proof that I've made real meat? I don't think so.
And now, let's imagine a highly sophisticated machine which is so good that after an hour of dialog, it hasn't tripped up and revealed its artificial nature.
I would want to ask, is a simulation of intelligence intelligence, or is it merely a simulation of intelligence? There's a difference. One is real, the other is a well-perpetrated fraud. A con.
You and I (assuming you're not a simulation) are intelligent enough to know our nature. We know that we are carbon-based, flesh and blood, mortal, subject to a variety of illnesses, and feeling a full range of emotions from elation to fear to lust.
Can a machine which merely talks in a convincing way about these things really be thought of as intelligent? or is it just a whopping good simulation of intelligence?
To me, a truly intelligent machine wouldn't be a simulation of a human. It would know its a machine and the only feelings it would have would be whatever feelings a machine could have, which I assume would be fairly alien to a human. It might make a fairly bad participant in a Turing Test.
What do YOU think on this subject?
Is there a "Turing test" to determine whether or not a creationist is intelligent?
Why? Is one needed?
Yes, it's called actually reading the bible. If they come out of it without some questions then they failed the test.
It only measures how good a machine is at fooling a human. There are very cool things in Computer Science like self coding algorithms, but simulate human intelligence is something beyond a couple of phrases. That is why i usually refer to intelligence with the ability to create or improve on the existing.
My gripe is when people think that if a machine passes the Turing Test, it's proof that a machine can think. I'm not even sure what passing the test once means. It might pass today and fail tomorrow.
Passing the test once means
[that] machine is [good enough] at fooling a human [that the machine is human].
One juror might consider that the one writing back it's a human while other might consider it being a machine. It's a subjective consensus done by the jurors.
My gripe is when people think that if a machine passes the Turing Test, it's proof that a machine can think
It's a common misunderstanding, but it's not a big deal. After all, the goal is to simulate human expression.
There's a reason its called "Artificial Intelligence". If a computer were given a standard iq test, it would likely pass with flying colors, provided it had the necessary equipment for the test. The Turing test doesn't test for an actual intelligence quotient, it tests for the ability to seem human. It's only given to chat bots for a reason. Chat bots, no matter how sophisticated, only parse language, and give a response from a preselected series of answers. Once you identify the way it answers questions, then it's pretty easy to break it, and see the machine behind the curtain. There are new chatbots that have the ability to learn, which isn't always a good thing. Not for the reason one might think, probably having to do with certain movies staring a certain Austrian bodybuilder, but for reasons involving trolls. One of the first learning Chat bots was called Bucket.
Bucket is no longer online, and is nowadays remembered as /b/ucket, because of the group who found poor bucket and decided to try and teach it. /b/ucket became so corrupted that it was no longer able to form a coherent sentence, and when it could, it was either copied and pasted from Wikipedia, or a string of racist and homophobic slurs that would make an Aryan Brotherhood chapter gasp in astonishment.
I'm in no way a programmer beyond HTML, but about 25 years ago I wrote a small BASIC program that I called "A Session With Dr. Feldstein." After a brief introduction to how the "session" would be structured, the imaginary psychiatrist would ask something like "What brings you here?" and it didn't really matter what your reply was, because everything you said would elicit a question or leading response like "Tell me more" or "How do you feel about that?"
At the same time, the program did have a list of keywords it was looking for. Words like mother, father, sister, brother, family, fear, grief, and others. Each of these would have a shorter list of questions like, "You mentioned your mother. Tell me about her."
If you wanted to ask a question of the psychiatrist, you were told to be sure to end your questions with a question mark. When the program saw a question mark, it would say something like "Please, stick to the subject. Don't avoid talking about it."
This program could go on for quite some time sounding like a real therapy session.
Of course it couldn't deal with a situation where you rejected the rather narrow protocol of the exchanges, so it certainly wasn't AI in any sense of the word. But certainly it could go on for a while fooling the human.
That's the whole point. Alice and Cleverbot are the same thing. Some of the more sophisticated have several hundred keywords and sentences, and can even learn your name. They are useful however. Siri is also a simple chat bot, but also has the ability to use functions of the device to be considered a personal assistant. In fact, someone made a api that allows you to control just about anything by asking Siri to do it.
There are several Siri-like apps for Android phones as well. They will phone people on your contact list, tell you the distance between where you are and where you want to go, define words for you, bring up a Google map, etc.
Why not turn it around and trick the algorithm.
-It’s your birthday. Someone gives you a calfskin wallet. How do you react?
-You’ve got a little boy. He shows you his butterfly collection plus the killing jar. What do you do?
-You’re watching television. Suddenly you realize there’s a wasp crawling on your arm.
-You’re in a desert walking along in the sand when all of the sudden you look down, and you see a tortoise, crawling toward you. You reach down, you flip the tortoise over on its back. The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can’t, not without your help. But you’re not helping. Why is that?
-Describe in single words, only the good things that come into your mind. About your mother.