What is Digg?110 Comments
- andypop481, on 10/13/2008, -3/+42how does fooling someone into thinking its a person qualify as thought? i mean, they are all just running off computer programs coded to feign human conversation. bad title. Self awareness is where its at.
- darkyplasma, on 10/12/2008, -1/+30He only won $3,000? That's it?!
- Anzat, on 10/13/2008, -3/+31Can Sarah Palin pass the Turing Test?
- ThetaDot, on 10/13/2008, -0/+24would have liked to see a transcript of a typical conversation from the winning machine... darn
Edit: Hmm... is this the same one? http://www.elbot.com/
If you click the red button on the image it will bring up a window to talk to the machine.
Edit 2: There's also this conversation posted (from 2006 though): http://elbot.blogspot.com/2006/01/chat-from-poland ... - theviceroy, on 10/13/2008, -2/+21yeah its called a Turing test... been around for awhile now...
- theviceroy, on 10/13/2008, -1/+18your DNA is all just coding.
- JoshuaGross, on 10/13/2008, -0/+15Ya betcha!
- ninjarabbits, on 10/13/2008, -1/+14Who wants a thinking machine???? I thought the selling point of sex robots was that they wouldn't think.
- identitymatrix, on 10/13/2008, -0/+11If that is the same version of Elbot that just won $3,000 I'm not all that impressed. All it takes one extremely basic question to see if it is a robot:
"Which shape has more sides - a square or a triangle?"
What I like about this question is that it does not even need any complex reasoning or common sense or even calculations. The question is multiple choice and has a clear, parse-able structure. Looking up both words in the dictionary should give you enough information to answer the question. If the robot had a semantic network to store concepts it would just need to check the "sides" attribute for square and triangle and see which one was greater - a simple decision, yet the bot cannot do even this. All it can give is some witty responses that dodge the question. I suppose humans would also rather give a clever response than answer such a basic question directly, but if you pressed them for an answer I'm sure they would give you a definitive answer (or simply "All of them" if you're Palin). - SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/13/2008, -1/+11Whole religions are also based on the idea that the earth rests on the back of a giant turtle. What's your point?
- Scr4tchFury, on 10/13/2008, -1/+10I remember one of these experiments where several people thought a woman was a computer. I would have liked to see her chat log.
- diomedes31, on 10/13/2008, -0/+9I wonder if it was the same person that got them all wrong. Headline: Human Fails Turing Test.
BTW Can someone tell me what they use as learning sources for these things? Why don't they design them to spider blogsites' comments and forums 24/7. Then have a chat with them. If it turns out to be psychotic and is prone to violent outbursts we could at least say that it's a product of humanity's making. - TVarmy, on 10/13/2008, -0/+8Proctor? Proctor? This terminal is broken! It keeps ignoring my questions and randomly changing the subject.
- shotgunefx, on 10/13/2008, -0/+8An excerpt.
U> Hello.
A> Hey My name is Sarah.
U> Hi Sarah. Where do you live?
A> In the snow
U> In the snow? Where?
A> With the penguins.
U> Where is that?
A> In Alaska.
U> Really?
A> You betcha!
U> I thought all penguins lived in the southern hemisphere?
A> Um,
U> I didn't think there were any penguins in Alaska
A> Um, penguins live in many places, let me get back to ya on that.
U> What do you do?
A> I'm a mom and a reformer
U> A reformer?
A> Let me tell ya about John McCain
U> Huh? What is a reformer?
A> I"m a maverick
U> What does that mean?
A> Let me tell you about Alan Turing
..... - Scr4tchFury, on 10/13/2008, -0/+8No, it was real. There were no robes or wizard hats involved.
- Dumbledorito, on 10/13/2008, -2/+9When can we appoint one to be the Fed Secretary or head up the SEC?
- PunkRockRalph, on 10/13/2008, -0/+7you spelled your name wrong.
- AlienX3.5, on 10/13/2008, -0/+7What I've always wanted to try is getting two of these computers to talk to one another and see what happens
- inactive, on 10/13/2008, -1/+7Well, he did fail after all.
- ExRe, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6Wow, I'd have to say there is a small bug or two...
me: 1-0
it: The solution to that one is: 2!
unless it is supposed to suck at math...actually, ya, it looks like it is supposed to suck at math, none of the answers it gives are right. - arapro, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6You're in a desert, walking along in the sand, when all of a sudden you look down...
- theviceroy, on 10/13/2008, -0/+6the epistemology of cognitive functionalism is where its at.
- inactive, on 10/13/2008, -2/+7This is *****.
- anarchyinthekr, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5i love offending elbot with swear words
- migshark, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5Speedsteam, close but no cigar. The world rests on the back of four (used to be five but one slipped) elephants who are in turn standing on the back of an elephant. Honestly, how do you think the disc-shaped world would balance on the back of a turtle? That's preposterous.
- emdanan, on 10/13/2008, -0/+5"The ACEs tried to pass themselves off as humans to the judges. "
No, they didn't. A computer doesn't try, it doesn't expect, it doesn't hope, it doesn't get anxious and doesn't call for mommy. Nor does a virus or bacteria by the way. For the love of whatever-there-is-out-there, learn to write!
"The ACE's were designed to....." would be a better start. - talamantez, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4I'm a telemarketer. there are times when I don't pass the turing test.
- NoozeHound, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4Good point. Would they identify one another as human or not-human? Would they even play the game? Would they persevere for infinity with a banal guessing game, unable to 'think' the other is anything other than an interrgoator?
What if one changed the subject?
Nice tangent, thanks. - Metasquares, on 10/13/2008, -1/+5"An experiment has been taking place in Berkshire to see if robots are capable of intelligent thought."
A
"Scientists at the University of Reading tested five machines to see if they could pass themselves off as humans in text-based conversations with people."
B
A != B - Endit, on 10/13/2008, -0/+4Please adjust for inflation.
- arapro, on 10/13/2008, -1/+5You reach down and you flip the Lesbians over on their backs, Leon.
- sonar1, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3elbot cant do math
- RobotBuddha, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4And suddenly lesbians?
- TVarmy, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Agreed. This is well explained in the China-Room concept. Of course, a computer that can carry out a conversation could be very useful. With a good speech-to-text program, that'd be a very handy and intuitive interface for when your hands are full.
- uncleosbert, on 10/13/2008, -3/+6and how does one measure "self awareness"? whole religions are based on the idea that reality is just a test given to individuals by the creator to gauge our capacity for good and evil.
- Tarkaan, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4Dude, Skynet is going to hear you, would you please stop trying to bring about the end of human life as we know it? John Connor isn't around and Jack Bauer is busy...
- Philophobic, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4The same way your computer raises its fan speed when you punish it.
- uncleosbert, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4everything alive is mechanical. i don't see significant differences between some of our machines and insects. if you suffered brain damage that left you unable to feel pain, would that make you less than human? few people are willing to consider the choices we make when we decide what life is and how we should treat living things.
http://www.lobsterlib.com/feat/davidwallace/index. ... - AgahniMalebogia, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Or how about Vice President?
- LucFerris, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3When the results come in, I'm afraid we may be in trouble . . .
- Mujokan, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3"I disagree though because you and I both know that we have enjoyed music at one point in our lives"
How do you know that I know? Just by evidence that you get from my behavior. Same with some theoretical perfect AI. When you can't specify any criteria for judging whether something is "really" happening or just "seems" to be happening, the distinction is meaningless.
"We can feel emotions, which is a critical difference between computers and living things."
Right now it is -- for living things of a certain level of complexity at least. But as far as we know the embodied nervous system is entirely physical, and it's enough to produce consciousness, emotions, and all the rest.
It's important here to distinguish between the mind and the brain, though. The brain is physical. The word "physical" doesn't really apply to the mind, and neither does "non-physical". The mind is the source of language; you can talk about the mind ("I feel happy") but conscious experience can't be fully captured in verbal or other abstract description. Even if one explained its physical basis perfectly, that would still be the case.
That doesn't mean it's "magic" or whatever, it just means that language is limited. Saying it is "magic" doesn't explain anything further. It's still making the mistake of relying on words, with the added disadvantage of abandoning the scientific basis that can at least explain HOW it happens. - WiggyWack, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4And, they can't. There, now you don't have to read the article.
- archer104, on 10/13/2008, -1/+4That doesn't mean that consciousness is an illusion, only that free-will is an illusion.
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3The algorithm focuses on digg rate not quantity. Almost every front page article recently has someone crying about how few diggs it has. Get over it already.
- identitymatrix, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3It always answers one greater than the correct answer:
me:2+2
it:5
me:4*7
it:29
me: 4-4
it:The solution to that one is: 1!
me:23424*43652
it:1022504449
That last one is proof enough it is a robot - no human would gladly calculate 23424*43652 without also saying something like "Use a calculator next time" or "what do you think I am, a robot?".
Also interesting:
me:What is the sum of four and seven?
it:12
(off by one, following the previously observed pattern of adding one to the answer before returning it)
me:What is the product of four and seven?
it:12
So it can parse 4*7 and "what is the sum of four and seven" correctly, but not "what is the product of four and seven". - TVarmy, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Was it that jokey site where a guy programmed a simple chatbot to say it was a girl and ask people to cyber?
- DustyMagnum, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3Even if a robot did pass the Turing test, it's just manufacturing intelligence. Can't beat the real thing. A human won't give you a fatal syntax error.
I can just see the robot's heads exploding now... - christilovett, on 10/13/2008, -0/+2"User:
Elbot: FATAL ERROR 42: OMISSION OF SUPERFLUOUS INPUT"
Haha. - revslaughter, on 10/13/2008, -1/+3DING DING DING DING!! We have a winnar!
- nevaseez, on 10/13/2008, -2/+4Elboto failed by 5%
-
Show 51 - 100 of 114 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is