Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 17th Jul 2006 22:47 UTC, submitted by Eugenia
Geek stuff, sci-fi... "Artificial intelligence is 50 years old this summer, and while computers can beat the world's best chess players, we still can't get them to think like a 4-year-old. This week in Boston, some of the field's leading practitioners are gathering to examine this most ambitious of computer research fields, which at once has managed to exceed, and fall short of, our grandest expectations."
Permalink for comment 144616
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: The brain is not a CPU.
by Tom Janowitz on Wed 19th Jul 2006 19:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: The brain is not a CPU."
Tom Janowitz
Member since:

This sentence about duck etc. is taken from discussion about programming languages - far from intelligence subject. I guess Turing hadn't forseen in what way will the computing science -> evolve <- (pun intended). You could code very sofisticated data base of possible answers, which whould mimick human reactions, but that wouldn't of course be anything that we could call 'intelligent'.

How do I know if someone is intelligent ? First - I was referring to 'intelligence' as a process of ability to perform cognitive processess, to be able to understand at all. Well - I usually assume, that person netxt to me is a human being, a living organism, which resembles in it myself (brain included). And that usually implies some level of intelligence.

If we put some "dumb ass" before computer with a program which is able to make some conversation with humans (text being a medium), then this individual wouldn't probably have easy task recognising if this computer is intelligent or not.

Moreover some people are obviously able to attribute intelligence to objects which inherently can not possess this "feature" (superstitions, religions etc.). It doesn't mean that objects of their perceived intelligence are indeed intelligent. It says more about their "state of mind" instead.

Reply Parent Score: 1