Perhaps - but I submit it /is/ a test of "I'll know AI when I see it"
Cite?
I ask given - AIUI - Cleverbot, Eugene Goostman, Sophia, and Duplex et al have /not/ been generally accepted as passing the test - though I find Duplex is a step change in /sounding/ human.
I don't know what you mean by that.
The Turing test just tests the ability to mimic a human. Using typed responses, to questions in a short unsophisticated test, using unsophisticated judges.
In terms of AI the test is poor as it gives false positives, a pass can probably be achieved with little more than a massive database of appropriate responses.
It also gives false negatives in that a genuine computational intelligence will almost certainly be obviously different from human intelligence. For instance can you do instant square roots, or have a huge database recall ability.
A quick google suggests I was thinking of Eugene Goostman
I don't know what you mean universally. AIUI the conditions laid down by Turing were met. The test was passed. It might be failed another time, but that time it passed.
As I said It is a shit test.
Don't believe all you read in newspapers or on the BBC. All those reports in 2014 were based on the assertyion from the researchers that:
"The 65-year-old Turing Test is successfully passed if a computer is mistaken for a human more than 30% of the time during a series of five-minute keyboard conversations."
Not so. Turing /predicted/ that by 2000 a computer would be able to fool 30% for five minutes. But that's not how he /defined/ the test - witness the way he also predicted that it would be 2050+ before it'd pass a no hold barred test.
All set out more fully by Professor Copeland in 2014. See eg
PS I happen to know 'cos I've a shilling bet from 1970 riding on whether the Test is based by end-2020.
Er where did those arbitrary rules creep in ? What a load of bollocks.
The Turing test is passed when an interrogator is unable to distinguish an interaction between a computer and a human. And right now, that interaction would probably take 30 seconds to deliver a result.
I'd be sympathetic to a claim it had been passed if the interrogator was unable to tell after (say) 30 minutes.
What next ? Perpetual motion being "defined" as the ability to spin for a few seconds longer than expected ?
It has *some* basis on what Turing said
"I believe that in about fifty years? time it will be possible to programme computers, with a storage capacity of about 10^9, to make them play the imitation game so well that an average interrogator will not have more than 70 per cent, chance of making the right identification after five minutes of questioning."
Meanwhile, you try and get Google to list results about earbuds that don't have anything to do with apple ... no amount of fiddling with quotes and operators works.
works with uBO enabled
"earbuds -apple" seemed to do the trick for me.
The 5 pictures at the top of the listing admittedly still showed Apple earbuds but the actual listings below brought up Skullcandy, Bose. Samsung. Amazon Jam with no mention of apple.
michael adams
...
Apple don't make earbuds.
Apple make airpods. :-)
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.