Slashdot Mirror

That's because they have already been replaced by AI: just look at Cleverbot.

I don't think I communicated correctly. I don't know of anyone renting general access to their AI for it to perform various tasks like an AI MTurk. However, all the usual network services that people use every day are using prime time AIs to help with the service they perform for you. Google has AIs to decide what you're thinking of when you write search terms and what to show you when you visit Google News. Facebook has AIs to decide what advertising to show you. When you talk to a virtual assistant, there's AIs helping to try and get the assistant to do what you say, and helping to decide what advertisements your requests suggest would be best to throw your way when you're at a site with advertisers that pay for the AIs' suggestions. I feel confident that they're using AIs to help make catchpas that other AIs can't defeat. IBM bought the digital part of The Weather Channel so that they could use its data for selling weather predicting services of its AI. Here's an article telling how more than 100 web services are using Watson instances to power apps and other online business. Here's another article telling how Ross Intelligence is using a Watson to help lawyers act like they've read all the recent decisions. Eviebot and Cleverbot will chat with you. None of these are at the level of science fiction AIs, but they are providing actual value to their owners, and often to the customers of their owners.

And yet google did something similar with cleverbot http://www.cleverbot.com/ and the results were quite different.

The BEST way to learn about robotics is to study it in fictional media.

Pick up Star Trek, and study the cyborg known as Data. Pay attention to the Borg, and trace what little clues are there in their origin. Pick up Doctor Who and look at the Cybermen and Daleks, and pay attention to why the Doctor's always at war with them.

Pick up the movie "Terminator" and study the interactions the robots have.

Look at Elbot (http://elbot_e.csoica.artificial-solutions.com/), and Cleverbot, and pay attention to the similarities in the information acquisition, the discontinuities both exhibit, and the vocabularies (here: http://www.cleverbot.com/ [cleverbot.com])

Your computer, the one you are sending this request to, is a rudimentary robot. It includes peripherals which provide the computer stimulus in digitally interpreted fashion. Fictional media resources feature robotics which acts in a very predictable fashion, there's no spontaneity, the actions are guided, and there teds to be responses in reactive form to external stimulus received in highly predictable fashions.

So my advice is - before you go and get the Microsoft Robotics SDK or anyone else's interpretation of robotics, then study the core Microsoft Windows operating system at a messaging and routing perspective. Specifically: the WM_ messages and ask yourself - how are devices which 'come online' notified system wide?

What you're going to find is: software vendors have a habit of detaching you, the developer, by building in object layers and layers of abstraction away from the physical events themselves, but Windows - from the ground up - was actually built FOR robotics based on a messaging system and adoption of new peripheral devices that would be built, later, and applications developed for them once the device came online and found widespread use.

Take up Microsoft Visual Studio - C++ for a direct and easy to manage message pump and study they effects in the message pump when devices are brought online. My advice is to pull down Visual Studio 2005 or 2008, both of which Microsoft distributes as torrents if you can't afford it here: https://kat.cr/usearch/microso... [kat.cr]

Now be careful. Other languages such as Java, Python and ;NET may offer SOME semblance of message pump handling, but it's abstracted away from the hardware layer through volatile assemblies which have seen a ton of problems with compatibility and mismanagement of memory, not to mention it's not nearly as fast as managing the message pump yourself.

Now what's this all have to do with robotics?

If you study media, you understand where civilization is going and what - hardware wise - we have in store for our future. There's no 'quick and dirty' solution to robotics programming, the software is already all available out there, you just gotta learn how to learn about it and leverage it for yourself.

And thats where practice, practice, practice comes in.

And a few expenditures.You aren't gonna be able to get by this in the end.

The BEST way to learn about robotics is to study it in fictional media.

Pick up Star Trek, and study the cyborg known as Data. Pay attention to the Borg, and trace what little clues are there in their origin. Pick up Doctor Who and look at the Cybermen and Daleks, and pay attention to why the Doctor's always at war with them.

Pick up the movie "Terminator" and study the interactions the robots have.

Look at Elbot (http://elbot_e.csoica.artificial-solutions.com/), and Cleverbot, and pay attention to the similarities in the information acquisition, the discontinuities both exhibit, and the vocabularies (here: http://www.cleverbot.com/)

Your computer, the one you are sending this request to, is a rudimentary robot. It includes peripherals which provide the computer stimulus in digitally interpreted fashion. Fictional media resources feature robotics which acts in a very predictable fashion, there's no spontaneity, the actions are guided, and there teds to be responses in reactive form to external stimulus received in highly predictable fashions.

So my advice is - before you go and get the Microsoft Robotics SDK or anyone else's interpretation of robotics, then study the core Microsoft Windows operating system at a messaging and routing perspective. Specifically: the WM_ messages and ask yourself - how are devices which 'come online' notified system wide?

What you're going to find is: software vendors have a habit of detaching you, the developer, by building in object layers and layers of abstraction away from the physical events themselves, but Windows - from the ground up - was actually built FOR robotics based on a messaging system and adoption of new peripheral devices that would be built, later, and applications devel

First and foremost, credentials for CS related AI and machine learning are largely meaningless right now.

So my first piece of advice is to quit 'seeking' instruction like a computer waiting for further input and get into motivating yourself through self study.

Secondly, keep in mind that machine learning is something that will take an enormous amount of time out of your schedule after you've gotten the basics of the learning engine completed. You HAVE to interact with it and allow others to in order for it to truly learn.

With that said, here's some wonderful ways to help others with their AI projects - and also a way for you to to get started researching and studying, from the outside, the dynamics of dialog and interaction that you'll be working on as a CS programmer.
Elbot: http://elbot_e.csoica.artifici...
Cleverbot: http://www.cleverbot.com/
Existor (her name's Evie) is based on the cleverbot script: https://www.existor.com/en/
and Skynet: http://www.skynet-ai.com/

Third. You're an engineer by trade. If you truly want to understand how to make a machine think. Then take psychology courses, marketing courses, education courses, economics beyond macro and micro are all helpful to understand psychological motivation of populations, and more. Why do all this? A machine can 'wait' and consume information, but that doesn't make it intelligent. What makes it intelligent is it's desire to participate in the community it belongs to and that belongs to it. Psychology - whether it's through market forces or internalized - is what we now know as a population motivates. Integrating these into an AI is critical.

Fourth. Take a look information storage and retrieval systems and become an expert in databases, weighted algorithms, and different levels of normalization. The book 'Data Insights' By Hunter Whitney is a wonderful book on information systems and the different potential ways to perceive data. If you're poor like I am, Hunter has distributed a full copy of Data Insights through torrent web sites, with his only request being: If you can afford it, and the book has provided benefit to you, then please pay for the real copy. you can find at any Barnes and Noble in the country

This leads directly to neural networking. My advice from there is to dig into peer to peer networking and to understand how these systems function. Bitcoin's open source, and provides a wonderful example of what not to do with a peer to peer network and information storage, which you can see by the massive gigabit chain you have to download.

Why this is all necessary:

With a MS in CS and 15 years experience, you should by now be able to create at least a mid sized client server or n-tier application, end to end.

Now you gotta figure out your input stimulus for your AI. Are you acquiring information from text input alone? Are you acquiring it through a Kinect device connected via a USB and pulling out 3d data and sound? Are you placing your AI on the internet as a chatbot? Will the thing be mobile? If so, how?

Knowing your stimulus and nailing it down to a few input devices is crucial to developing a learning system.

From there, your next goal is to develop the support systems which 'go' with the AI.

And this can WILDLY vary depending on your methods of stimulation.

For the most part though, if you don't have proficiency with databases and data stores, Then you're not going to understand memory retention schemes for AI properly and how and when to optimize your database and the differences in normalization schemes.

So go get a job in databases for a few years then come back. These are a dime a dozen and easy to find anywhere. Pick your database wisely, you'll probably stick with it for your career - and it's hard not to be a database bigot afterwa

It was passed as defined

The Turing Test was not passed, and the only people who claim it was are ignorant reporters looking for an easy story with a catchy headline and tech morons who also believe Kevin Warwick is a cyborg.

The test was rigged in every way possible:

- judges told they were talking to a child
- that doesn't speak English as a primary language
- which was programmed with the express intent of misdirection
- and only "fooled" 30% of the judges.

And, even after all that, Cleverbot did a much better job back in 2011 with a 60% success rate.

This Eugene test outcome was a complete farce -- something to remind everyone that Warwick still exists and to separate the ignorant and sensational tech news trash rags from the more legitimate sources of information.

I want to talk to these AIs myself! Give me a webpage or irc chatroom to interact with it directly.

It might be interesting, but when these things have been made available in the past, I've always been disappointed.

Example: Cleverbot, which, as TFA notes, supposedly passed the Turing test by convincing people it was 59% human, as reported almost three years ago here.

The numbers for Cleverbot sounded a LOT better than this story, and yet -- well, chat with the damn thing for a couple minutes. See what you think. Try to "test" it with even some basic questions designed to fool an AI that even a relatively stupid 13-year-old could answer. It will fail. It comes across as an unresponsive idiot. It's only if you engage with its crap questions that it begins to seem anything like "conversation" -- if you try to get it to actually talk about ANYTHING, it will rapidly become apparent that it's useless.

I have no doubt this thing does something similar.

I thought that's what Cleverbot was for

Congratulations, you've just invented Cleverbot.

Google might be using Cleverbot in some way?

Siri isn't just voice, it's voice hooked up to Cleverbot on the backend - truly revolutionary!

Yes, but I also found this:

http://cleverbot.com/machine

Really, if those are extracts from the event then I think when they say "don't be fooled" and "the model that did that is different from the one youâ(TM)ll find online" I think they mean don't be fooled, we're talking shit, it's the same stupid thing.

I am so dumping this into Cleverbot.

What makes you assume that that was a human, though? THAT is the interesting question. It was, in fact, cleverbot, which is a new variant of jabberwacky, and was the one taking part. It's intended to be a little less wacky ... and a bit cleverer. It's more fuzzy, and uses still deeper context. Cleverbot uses the same learnt data as jabberwacky, and in that 'taco soup' example, it clearly let it down. The tests were very short, which is the primary reason why some judges were fooled, though I now believe, with hindsight, that a longer test would have been better for my entry. The length allowed bots that take control of the conversation to shine, sometimes, but that usually falls apart after a little while. The online version at http://www.cleverbot.com/ doesn't do quite so much processing as the competition one. Rollo Carpenter