3 ms·
> Surely it already has. Not consistently and repeatably, and not quite under the conditions Turing proposed That seems like a long winded way of saying it has
by clipsy 4y ago
> Surely it already has. Not consistently and repeatably, and not quite under the conditions Turing proposed
That seems like a long winded way of saying it hasn’t passed. The details are quite important in the actual Turing test; if the standard was fooling anyone at any time, then even ELIZA could pass the Turing test.
- bko 4y agoTuring said: > I believe that in about fifty years’ time it will be possible to programme computers, with a storage capacity of about 109, to make them play the imitation game so well that an average interrogator will not have more than 70 percent chance of making the right identification after five minutes of questioning. … I believe that at the end of the century the use of words and general educated opinion will have altered so much that one will be able to speak of machines thinking without expecting to be contradicted. The standard is more than 70% odds of detecting a fake. If you did below 50% it would be weird because if you were more likely to think a robot is a human than an actual human, you'd just flip your prediction and be above 50% https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/turing-test/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/turing-test/