Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 6313666" data-attributes="member: 8835">I disagree here on the concept of a &quot;True AI&quot; not being a model that we are comparing to.&nbsp; Not in that nobody knows what a True AI is, so much as there are obvious things that are not a True AI.&nbsp; A rock is not a True AI, nor is a plain chatbot.Even the Duck test has to exclude, that a thing designed to fool&nbsp; the Duck test specifically by its test parameters is not automatically granted recognition as a Duck.Especially when you consider the scope of what undocumented attributes are being tested for when you look at the Duck Candidate.&nbsp; You're looking at its feathers, it's breathing.&nbsp; Who knows what else.It's my belief (or opinion which holds as much weight as it is worth to you), that Turing expected to see technology progress to where the AI really did have the mental faculties of a real person.&nbsp; or close enough to it in the early stages.&nbsp; His idea was the modern equivalent of &quot;I think, therefore I am.&quot; in that he wouldn't count a chatbot parroting that onto the screen, he was expecting to find that for all intents and purposes, the AI was thinking, and thus was sentient.Bear in mind, for the purposes of discussion, I don't care about the Media or Captain Cyborg aspects of the original story.&nbsp; I'm talking about the point of the test, and why a chatbot designed to fool a human performing the Turing Test cannot qualify.If nothing else, it is because the intent of the Goostman project was to cheat the Turing Test, it is effectively disqualified from passing the Turing Test.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Janx, post: 6313666, member: 8835"] I disagree here on the concept of a "True AI" not being a model that we are comparing to. Not in that nobody knows what a True AI is, so much as there are obvious things that are not a True AI. A rock is not a True AI, nor is a plain chatbot. Even the Duck test has to exclude, that a thing designed to fool the Duck test specifically by its test parameters is not automatically granted recognition as a Duck. Especially when you consider the scope of what undocumented attributes are being tested for when you look at the Duck Candidate. You're looking at its feathers, it's breathing. Who knows what else. It's my belief (or opinion which holds as much weight as it is worth to you), that Turing expected to see technology progress to where the AI really did have the mental faculties of a real person. or close enough to it in the early stages. His idea was the modern equivalent of "I think, therefore I am." in that he wouldn't count a chatbot parroting that onto the screen, he was expecting to find that for all intents and purposes, the AI was thinking, and thus was sentient. Bear in mind, for the purposes of discussion, I don't care about the Media or Captain Cyborg aspects of the original story. I'm talking about the point of the test, and why a chatbot designed to fool a human performing the Turing Test cannot qualify. If nothing else, it is because the intent of the Goostman project was to cheat the Turing Test, it is effectively disqualified from passing the Turing Test. [/QUOTE]

Verification