From: Charles Hixson (charleshixsn@earthlink.net)
Date: Sat Aug 17 2002 - 14:12:18 MDT
OTOH, if you were to produce a machine that was indistinguishable from a bird,
then it would definitely be a flying machine.
Turing's test is excellent for it's real purpose. It was designed to convince
skeptics to at least consider that under some circumstances they might be
willing to admit that a computer was intelligent. It was never intended as a
minimum qualification, or even as something that would be likely to ever be
achieved.
On Saturday 17 August 2002 09:19, Christopher Whipple wrote:
> Does schmoozing make robots clever?
> http://rss.com.com/2100-1040-950237.html?type=pt&part=rss&tag=feed&subj=newąŁ
>s
>
> "I think the Turing test is a bad idea because it's completely fake,"
> Steels said. "It's like saying you want to make a flying machine, so you
> produce something that is indistinguishable from a bird. On the other
> hand, an airplane achieves flight but it doesn't need to flap its wings."
>
> -----
>
> Is it wrong to measure machine intelligence with the same metric that we
> use to measure our own? Should we instead be focusing on a machine's
> own unique brand of intelligence and culture?
>
> I'd imagine these same questions apply to dolphins, lower primates, etc.
>
> -crw.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:11 MST