I wonder whether Alan Turing would have thought a 13-yr old boy would be a sufficient challenge:
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27762088
I thought that IBM's performance in the game show Jeopardy was pretty amazing. Given that semantics were involved and not brute-force calculation, I think that was a greater achievement than defeating world's chess champions.
Originally posted by moonbusAnd besides, the test passes if only 1/3rd of the judges think it is human? What kind of test is that? I would have thought a majority would be needed to get a pass. At least 50%.
I wonder whether Alan Turing would have thought a 13-yr old boy would be a sufficient challenge:
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27762088
I thought that IBM's performance in the game show Jeopardy was pretty amazing. Given that semantics were involved and not brute-force calculation, I think that was a greater achievement than defeating world's chess champions.
Originally posted by sonhouseAm I a Turing machine simulating a FabianFnas person, or not, who can tell anymore?
And besides, the test passes if only 1/3rd of the judges think it is human? What kind of test is that? I would have thought a majority would be needed to get a pass. At least 50%.
Originally posted by FabianFnasHmm, maybe you're a multiple-personality and only 1/3 of you is FabianFnas; the other 2/3 might be cyborg--in which case, you've topped the 30% margin for fooling us into thinking you're human.
Am I a Turing machine simulating a FabianFnas person, or not, who can tell anymore?