Lars Marius Garshol (larsga@ifi.uio.no)
Fri, 3 Oct 1997 03:51:16 +0100
* Bodvar Skutvik
ö
ö Ä...Å did I spot the same 'difficulty' with you James? I.e.:
ö That Computers must enter the (MOQ) Intellectual level to be declared
ö intelligent?
Bodvar, what do you feel a computer must do to enter the Intellectual
level? As you can see below, I don't think passing the Turing test is
sufficient. What would you consider sufficient? And what would it mean,
calling a piece of silicone intelligent? Would it have human rights?
In what way would its intelligence be different from our intelligence?
ö Magnus in his usual fashion waved off Alan Turings test for intelligence,
ö but Turing is after all the father of computation as we know it, so if he
ö couldn't come up with another criterion of intelligence (than not being
ö able to distinguish it from a human being), I doubt if we can do any
ö better.
The Turing test is not really acknowledged as a good test, as there are
quite a few things that can cause trouble with it. In fact, Joseph
Weizenbaum wrote the famous Eliza program to prove how easy it is to
pass the test. Eliza is a very simple program that pretends to be a
psychoanalyst of a particular school of psychologists that had a very
simple therapy that mostly consisted of asking the patient questions.
So Eliza asks you a lot of questions based on the last thing you wrote,
which is just twists a little, changing me to you etc. Eliza fooled a
lot of people, including Weizenbaums secretary, who demanded to be left
alone with the program, claiming that only it understood her.
The transcript at
http://www.solent.ac.uk/socsci/cjc/eliza.html
gives a quite good impression of what Eliza is like.
Annually there is held a contest based on the Turing test in New York,
called the Loebner Contest. Several computer programs and a human being
are all judged by several judges who try to determine which of the
conversants are the human. Jason Hutchens, who has participated several
times and won once, has a very good page on this at
http://ciips.ee.uwa.edu.au/ühutch/hal/
Although Turing was in a sense the father of modern computation he died
before anyone had much experience with computation. In fact, his most
important results, like the halting problem proof, predated the first
computers. So he's not such an authority on this as it might seem.
ö "There is intellect outside of language" you state. Hmmmm. Perception,
ö experience, yes. Even intelligence, but the (Quality) Intellect is
ö dependent upon symbolic language. It IS language in my opinion.
Could you elaborate on the distinction between Q Intellect and
intelligence? It seems important. :)
BTW: An extremely good book on AI (and a lot of other things, like Zen
and thinking in general) is Douglas Hofstadters Gödel, Escher, Bach.
More info at
http://birk105.studby.uio.no/download/diverse/databoker.html#GEB
-- ________________________________________________________________________Lars Marius Garshol
"Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot", Bill Arnett http://www.ifi.uio.no/ülarsga/ http://birk105.studby.uio.no/
-- post message - mailto:skwokÉspark.net.hk unsubscribe/queries - mailto:dianaÉasiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:04 CEST