Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Was Turing Test Legitimately Beaten, Or Just Cleverly Tricked?

Posted by timothy on from the in-this-case-please-distinguish dept.

beaker_72 (1845996) writes "On Sunday we saw a story that the Turing Test had finally been passed. The same story was picked up by most of the mainstream media and reported all over the place over the weekend and yesterday. However, today we see an article in TechDirt telling us that in fact the original press release was just a load of hype. So who's right? Have researchers at a well established university managed to beat this test for the first time, or should we believe TechDirt who have pointed out some aspects of the story which, if true, are pretty damning?" Kevin Warwick gives the bot a thumbs up, but the TechDirt piece takes heavy issue with Warwick himself on this front.

5 of 309 comments (clear)

  1. but that's the problem with the turing test... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It has nothing to do with actual artificial intelligence and everything to do with writing deceptive scripts. It's not just this incident, it's a problem with the goal of the Turing test itself. I always found the Turing test a kind of stupid exercise due to this.

    1. Re:but that's the problem with the turing test... by flaming+error · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They got 30% of the people to think they were texting with a child with limited language skills. I don't think that's what Alan Turing had in mind.

    2. Re:but that's the problem with the turing test... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It has nothing to do with actual artificial intelligence and everything to do with writing deceptive scripts. It's not just this incident, it's a problem with the goal of the Turing test itself. I always found the Turing test a kind of stupid exercise due to this.

      Yes. TechDirt's points 3 and 6 are basically the same thing I wrote here the other day:

      First, that the "natural language" requirement was gamed. It deliberately simulated someone for whom English is not their first language, in order to cover its inability to actually hold a good English conversation. Fail.

      Second, that we have learned over time that the Turing test doesn't really mean much of anything. We are capable of creating a machine that holds its own in limited conversation, but in the process we have learned that it has little to do with "AI".

      I think some of TechDirt's other points are also valid. In point 4, for example, they explain that this wasn't even the real Turing test.

    3. Re:but that's the problem with the turing test... by TheCarp · · Score: 5, Funny

      Please tell me more about like something a chatbot would say.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  2. Program pretends to be foreign child, not adult by dunkindave · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those who haven't read the article (I read one yesterday and assume the details are the the same): The program claimed to be a Ukrainian boy of 13 years old, a non-native English speaker, writing in English to English speakers. This allowed the program to avoid the problem of people using language to make judgements about whether the responses were from a person or a program. Also, since the program was claiming to be a boy instead of an adult, it also greatly reduced what could be expected of the responses, again greatly simplifying the programs parameters and reducing what the testers could use to test. So basically, the Turing Test is supposed to be a test if a person can tell if the program acts like a person, but here the test was rewritten to see if the program acted like a child from a different culture and who was supposed not to be speaking in his native language. Many are apparently crying foul.

    I personally agree.