«  
  »

Turing Test corollary?

Much effort has been put into getting machines to pass the so-called Turing Test. But, conversely, how does a machine know it’s talking to a human?

Picture credit: Loz Flowers

Picture credit: Loz Flowers

Turing Test corollary:  a human knowingly talking to a [telephone answering] machine often loses coherence and language skills, ergo machine knows human.

Email this post Email this post
  • http://www.projectpdq.com Phil

    In a human context doesn’t ‘knowing’ require sentience?

    What’s your definition of ‘know’ in the context of a machine?

    eg a record in a database? Sure, a program can detect that the record exists. That seems to me to be somewhat superficial though.

    Hmmm…

  • http://www.mediamice.net Sean Sweeney

    Are you subscribing to sentience as being philosophical or metaphysical?
    Philosophical subscribes to feeling, eg pleasure & pain. Animals are sentient but do they subscribe to being intelligent? Do not mistake trained response as being intelligent, how many cows have hot wired a car to escape the milking session?
    So what about the Metaphysical? Ensuring our respect and care. We show a metaphysical sentience in regard to animals, and computers can “learn” to become sentient in a metaphysical sense as they are respectful, and assist us in achieving our goals, but this depends on the programmer, teacher, parent, mentor of said computer, just like any other sentient being.
    We are a database of stuff, our brain is a unique database, but our brain is also phalible the longer it works. How much have you forgotten?