I was referring to the famous quote from Dijkstra: "The Fathers of the field had been pretty confusing: John von Neumann speculated about computers and the hum

I was referring to the famous quote from Dijkstra: "The Fathers of the field had been pretty confusing: John von Neumann speculated about computers and the human brain in analogies sufficiently wild to be worthy of a medieval thinker and Alan M. Turing thought about criteria to settle the question of whether Machines Can Think, a question of which we now know that it is about as relevant as the question of whether Submarines Can Swim." http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD08xx/EWD898.html http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD08xx/EW... Nobody is suggesting submarines can think. The actual point that Dijkstra was making is that it matters what the machine is capable of, but it doesn't matter what we call the thing that it does. If your private definition of intelligence doesn't allow you to apply it to machines, that's irrelevant.