Can computers win the Turing Test? Imagine a day when a machine will say, "Move over Turing! You can no longer consider machines to be less smart than humans! After all, we can think too. We do all the thinking and processing and you take all the credit, just because you are our creator! ". That would be an awkward and exciting situation. To be honest, there is a valid argument here in this imaginary conversation. As naive as it may sound for now, let me assure you that such a scenario is not far away. Applications are becoming more and more logic-oriented and increasingly intelligent.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2005-07-06
"I'll believe in artificial intelligence when a computer commits suicide because it thinks it's too fat.
Spot on. In short: Will. Never. Happen. "
Uh? Because suicides for emotional reasons are a necessary premise for intelligence??
Think about it: if we met aliens and learned that those aliens never commit suicide for emotional reason, would that be enough to tell that these aliens cannot be intelligent?
Obviously no!
In short: your quote is stupid.
Member since:2007-12-26
There are not many animals that commit suicide out of emotional reasons (there are some that do it for the greater good) though there are animals that are near or equal to human intelligence, dolphins, elephants, rooks (they might not have schools, nifty little hands or an advanced language so we're still more knowledgeable)
I don't think committing suicide is a sign of intelligence, a lack of it seems actually more logical.
Edited 2009-09-23 19:11 UTC
Member since:2009-06-23
While I certainly agree that AI has nothing to do with the examples used in this article (erroneously thought to show basic forms of AI), except one, and while I agree that now-unimaginable breakthroughs are needed before we can even dream of caricaturing sentient-level intelligence --- I also fail to see how Incompleteness has anything to do with intelligence. Could you expand on that?
(But please don't simply define it. Explain how come it affects *intelligence* and why it is not trivial to abstract/trick away.)
Member since:2006-01-03
What is intelligence? Everybody knows and they all disagree, so let me summarize: the word intelligence actually means me-likeness. If you look and do like me, then you're an intelligent person. Nothing wrong with that, but it is a cultural phenomena, not technical and you can not emulate it with switching (logic).
I do not claim that machine that completely emulates us can not be built, we are the living proofs. But to make it by ourselves, never mind how contradictory it sounds, the knowledge of how we work is needed - not only model of brains and interaction but model of human as a cultural being. Society at the moment goes into the wrong direction but this theory will never be built anyway. Still if you imagine one, you will have no problem seeing how it satisfies the incompleteness theorem.
One problem though: machine that beats you in a gun fight is already built... Those damn cultural and exsistentional details 
Member since:
2006-01-03
Logical thinking has it's very clear limits that were recently proved by Gödel, shown by others throughout our history and demonstrated in this article. I was a cyberpunker long time ago, so I won't completely shatter the illusion.