Philosophy Now Forum

Yesterday, at the University of Reading in London, a computer convinced human judges that it was actually a 13-year-old Ukrainian boy. By convincing one-third of the judging panel of its humanity, it became the first computer ever to pass the famous Turing Test.

Wyman wrote:Will computers one day replace forum participants on PhilosophyNow?

Wyman wrote:Joking aside,

Wyman wrote:what would it matter to you if you were talking to a live human or a computer if you could not tell the difference?

uwot wrote:

Wyman wrote:what would it matter to you if you were talking to a live human or a computer if you could not tell the difference?

I think what would be more interesting is if we could get an answer to what it feels like to be a computer. As long as a computer is fooling us it is a human being, there is no evidence that it is self aware. (As a slightly paranoid dystopian aside, is it wise to strive to make machinery deceitful?)

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy wrote: The phrase “The Turing Test” is most properly used to refer to a proposal made by Turing (1950) as a way of dealing with the question whether machines can think. According to Turing, the question whether machines can think is itself “too meaningless” to deserve discussion (442). However, if we consider the more precise—and somehow related—question whether a digital computer can do well in a certain kind of game that Turing describes (“The Imitation Game”), then—at least in Turing's eyes—we do have a question that admits of precise discussion. Moreover, as we shall see, Turing himself thought that it would not be too long before we did have digital computers that could “do well” in the Imitation Game.

The phrase “The Turing Test” is sometimes used more generally to refer to some kinds of behavioural tests for the presence of mind, or thought, or intelligence in putatively minded entities.

jackles wrote:the computer is relaying the response of the program which moves.self awarness doesnt move cos it has no difinable size.

Wyman wrote:

Yesterday, at the University of Reading in London, a computer convinced human judges that it was actually a 13-year-old Ukrainian boy. By convincing one-third of the judging panel of its humanity, it became the first computer ever to pass the famous Turing Test.

Will computers one day replace forum participants on PhilosophyNow?

Joking aside, what would it matter to you if you were talking to a live human or a computer if you could not tell the difference?

morganna swish wrote: However, what would probably be missing would be the exchange of 'experience' - the 'chatterings' and explorations. Even if that could be simulated, I might feel somewhat cheated.

Sappho de Miranda wrote:

morganna swish wrote: However, what would probably be missing would be the exchange of 'experience' - the 'chatterings' and explorations. Even if that could be simulated, I might feel somewhat cheated.

Most likely you would be just as disappointed by the missing 'exchange of 'experience' - 'chatterings' and explorations' of a 13 year old Ukranian male child if you sort to engage a philosophical discussion. I know I would be.

morganna swish wrote:

Sappho de Miranda wrote:

morganna swish wrote: However, what would probably be missing would be the exchange of 'experience' - the 'chatterings' and explorations. Even if that could be simulated, I might feel somewhat cheated.

Most likely you would be just as disappointed by the missing 'exchange of 'experience' - 'chatterings' and explorations' of a 13 year old Ukranian male child if you sort to engage a philosophical discussion. I know I would be.

Why do you think you would be disappointed ?

Most likely you would be just as disappointed by the missing 'exchange of 'experience' - 'chatterings' and explorations' of a 13 year old Ukranian male child if you sort to engage a philosophical discussion. I know I would be.

Why do you think you would be disappointed ?

morganna swish wrote:

Most likely you would be just as disappointed by the missing 'exchange of 'experience' - 'chatterings' and explorations' of a 13 year old Ukranian male child if you sort to engage a philosophical discussion. I know I would be.

Why do you think you would be disappointed ?

Sorry, I thought I made that clear. Essentially I would be disappointed by the 'missing exchange of 'experience'. Also the child's lack of knowledge would prove frustrating as I am not inclined towards the role of mentor or teacher.

OK, so you think that a teenage boy, living in the Ukraine, would have insufficient experience, or knowledge, to stimulate a discussion on anything philosophical.
That's quite an assumption to make, isn't it ?

It depends on the level of philosophical discussion you are looking for.
Perhaps listening to someone of lesser philosophical maturity but gaining insight into another world could bring a new direction to your thoughts ?

Essentially I would be disappointed by the 'missing exchange of 'experience'. Also the child's lack of knowledge would prove frustrating as I am not inclined towards the role of mentor or teacher.

I think Sappho de Miranda is drawing a distinction between "knowledge" and "experience" A computer can have the knowledge, but it can't have the experience. A computer can ACT like it has experience, but it will only ever be an act, it can never actually have human experiences.

P.S. I would also think that a 13 year old would have limited experiences compared to an adult. This could explain why some judges were fooled, but that's just a guess on my part.

P.S. I would also think that a 13 year old would have limited experiences compared to an adult. This could explain why some judges were fooled, but that's just a guess on my part.

Impenitent wrote:ask Eldras

-Imp