4 ms·
> I think I'm with Dijkstra on this one: "The question of whether machines can think is about as relevant as the question of whether submarines can swim" Just
by simiones 3y ago
> I think I'm with Dijkstra on this one: "The question of whether machines can think is about as relevant as the question of whether submarines can swim"
Just a nitpick, but this is Turing, not Dijkstra. And it is in fact his argument in the famous "Turing Test" paper - he gives his test (which he calls "the imitation game") as an objective measure of something like AGI instead of the vague notion of "thinking", analogously to how we test successful submarines by "can it move underwater for some distance without killing anyone inside" rather than "can it swim".
- flir 3y agoThanks, that's not a nitpick at all. Can you provide a citation? It's all over the internet as a Dijkstra quote, and I'd like to be correct.
- 1xdevnet 3y agoFairly certain it is Dijkstra, in his own handwriting in 1984. https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD08xx/EWD898.html https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD08xx/EWD898... https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/ewd08xx/EWD898.PDF https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/ewd08xx/EWD898.PDF
- simiones 3y agoIt seems I made some confusions, you were actually right. Apologies...
- flir 3y agoNah, I think it's good to get the context. I never realised Dijkstra probably had Turing's paper in mind when he said that.