5 ms·
Indeed embarrassing. Actually, I can't believe that they called this chat-bot in any way intelligent. On top of that, this level of chat is the same since 90s,
by ccozan 12y ago
Indeed embarrassing. Actually, I can't believe that they called this chat-bot in any way intelligent. On top of that, this level of chat is the same since 90s, how come nothing has changed? And anyway, text chatting is/will never be a measure of intelligence, the Turing test in this form should never be considered.
You really need to live 13 years as a boy to be able to answer as one.
- jacquesm 12y agoI've seen better in the 90's.
- notahacker 12y agoI've seen human AOL users that were worse in the 90s...
- ccozan 12y agoELIZA comes from the top of my head, and did impress me at that time ( '94 ? ). Lately I found out it had a psychologist side in it, as per original design and the answering with a question. Better? Maybe, maybe not. But after 20 years, to show no real progress at all? Baffling.
- pessimizer 12y agoELIZA is from 1966.
- DonHopkins 12y agoI've had conversations with more artificially intelligent text editors in the 90's. http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/text/rms-vs-doctor.html http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/text/rms-vs-doctor.html
- cardine 12y agoNot much has changed because the people, companies, and institutions capable of making such improvements are now focusing on things with actual real world application.
- crusso 12y agoYeah, and they're mostly in the financial world.