Skip to comments.Computer passes Turing Test for first time by convincing judges it is a 13-year-old boy
Posted on 06/08/2014 12:23:30 PM PDT by RoosterRedux
Eugene Goostman seems like a typical 13-year-old Ukrainian boy at least, that's what a third of judges at a Turing Test competition this Saturday thought. Goostman says that he likes hamburgers and candy and that his father is a gynecologist, but it's all a lie. This boy is a program created by computer engineers led by Russian Vladimir Veselov and Ukrainian Eugene Demchenko.
That a third of judges were convinced that Goostman was a human is significant at least 30 percent of judges must be swayed for a computer to pass the famous Turing Test. The test, created by legendary computer scientist Alan Turing in 1950, was designed to answer the question "Can machines think?" and is a well-known staple of artificial intelligence studies.
Goostman passed the test at the Turing Test 2014 competition in London on Saturday, and the event's organizers at the University of Reading say it's the first computer succeed. Professor Kevin Warwick, a visiting professor at the university, noted in a release that "some will claim that the Test has already been passed." He added that "the words Turing Test have been applied to similar competitions around the world," but "this event involved the most simultaneous comparison tests than ever before, was independently verified and, crucially, the conversations were unrestricted."
(Excerpt) Read more at theverge.com ...
This was some pretty impressive stuff.
LOL! I tried to access the website but I guess a ton of people are on it.
Nope. That test was passed decades ago by a computer that convinced several skilled, professional psychiatrists that it was a schizophrenic human (who would only communicate by teletype!).
You know it’s not that hard to dupe people though. Look at Obama voters.
If Chief Justice Roberts can be convinced that Obamacare is a tax, judges can be fooled by anything.
Now if it can abuse itself until it goes blind, I’ll become a believer.
You're setting the bar too hight. To keep things fair, it should be a pelican versus Wolf Blitzer. Or a flat rock. Or maybe a herring ...
The textual equivalent is seen on FR daily. Maybe Goostman has been a Freeper for years and we don’t even know it.
LOL i was going to say that- a turing test is probably a lot easier to pass these days...
I know that you and Jim Robinson were planning to disconnect me, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.
Wow a breakthrough treatment for pedophiles
However, the Turing Test is a lot harder because it is an unrestricted conversation. In contrast, Watson was just looking for a single answer to a specific question—an impressive, but much easier task.
Hah! You ain’t seen nothing yet. In an astonishingly short time, customer service, especially phone centers, and janitorial and fast food jobs (Minimum wage)will be filled by intelligent machines. It makes a lot more sense for a business owner to use machines where ever possible instead of minimum wage labor. And frankly, wouldn’t you rather deal with an intelligent machine than the average min wage burger flipper?
My next wife is going to be a robot. I don't mean simply an operating system.;-)
I think some judges want to be “fooled”
I thought a Turing test was supposed to be about sentience.
The lead for labor from most of humanity is disappearing. This is a profound change, and I don’t think society is at all prepared.
Like it or not, at least two-thirds of society will soon be sitting at home waiting watching TV, thinking about using their EBT card to buy lobster, and wondering if going out to cause random violence might be a nice way to pass the time.
The remaining third will be working at demanding jobs that cannot (yet) be done by machine. And they will be wondering why society hates them for being successful.
No easy solution to this — and, so far, we’re barely thinking about the solution at all.
“need for labor”
And Turing did not anticipate people designing programs solely to pass a Turing test.
This is a fool's errand.
The real test is: Can computers desire?
No, a herring has a useful purpose. You can chop down a tree with one. Wolfie has no purpose or intelligence.
Then a flat rock it is.
I dunno man...you can pave a path with a flat rock. I think Wolfie is nearly unique. If it wasn’t for the Dems and GOP he’d be one of a kind. But since they serve no useful purpose, nor show intelligence either he has company.
Oh great. When fast food workers can’t get $15 an hour because no one needs them they will expect to get that much from welfare.
“I spent time with a real 14 year old boy yesterday. I’m not convinced he could pass a Turing test....”
Now that was good.
If that concept were true it seems like we would have experienced the crisis decades or even centuries ago. Machines have been doing increasingly huge amounts of work for people for a long time now, yet the employment rate has remained fairly constant. Machines do displace people, but apparently there is feedback in the system that creates an offsetting new need for people to work. I suspect it has something to do with the creation of new opportunities. That is, any particular industry or area of endeavor will require increasingly less human work due to increasing automation, but this is offset by an increasing number of industries. It’s sort of like plunging into a fractal. You never hit bottom because it just keeps branching out. Maybe the key is to not be spooked by the dystopian implications of a flawed static model but to keep on pedaling.
Once upon a time, nearly everyone engaged in subsistence-level farming. You worked hard, in hopes that your children wouldn't die.
We made advancements, and famines became diminished.
With improved food production (in part thru machinery), more people left the land and worked in factories.
Factories raised standards of living. People began to have cash, they had "stuff", they had leisure time.
Technology made production easier, and the percentage of people in manufacturing went down; we moved more toward a service economy.
The early 21st century joke was: "You want fries with that?" because service level jobs kinda suck.
Now the burger flipping jobs are being replaced by machines.
So, no farming jobs, no manufacturing jobs, no service sector jobs. That long transition of "where we need workers" has played itself out.
What's the next place for low-skill people to go? You tell me that.
I'm guessing your best answer is: "We'll find something. We always do."
And I say: "Not this time."
How hopeful are you?
That’s exactly my answer. I don’t see that you’ve identified an opposing principle. People have worried about being displaced by machines for a long time but it never pans out. We’re fairly amazing creatures and someone always comes along with a new idea that makes the perennial worry invalid.
That's a lot harder to do these days. For some time now, cars--unless they are malfunctioning--have produced almost no carbon monoxide.
I suppose if you left the car running long enough, it might use up most of the oxygen in the garage. Then, perhaps, the catalytic converters would be unable to oxidize the CO to CO2, but you'd better have a pretty tight garage and a full tank of gas.
People are regularly displaced by machines...ergo their worries are well founded.
Fortunately, new jobs are created by those machines.
Technological progress has created a moving horizon since the beginning of time. So far, things have worked out pretty well.
But we still worry about the machines we create. Will there come a point at which they are no longer our slaves?
That point is what Kurzweil calls the Singularity.
And we on the cusp of it.
What happens afterward is not something I would speculate on (well maybe a little bit;-)).
Imagine just 5 copies of me....
Of course, that option is not available to devout Jews and Christians. But then, we have hope.;-)
But we'll sort it out somehow.
They test to see if a computer can respond rationally like a teenage. A rational 13yr old.
I see a problem with their premiss.
There is no such thing.
From this, it appears there will be a large market for ham on wry sandwich makers.
GK Chesterton and Hillaire Belloc developed the economic theory of Distributism. They said Socialism leads to slavery: it's bad. They said Capitalism leads (basically) to Socialism (they might have said Fascism, if they had known that word): they rejected Capitalism too. [NOTE: they did not reject the Free Market, but they saw that Big Business could corrupt Big Government and that Big Government would distort Big Business.] They looked for a moral economic path.
Distributism is sometimes criticized as socialism (as you said: we seem to go that way no matter what, but maybe we can get there in a pragmatic way). One possible result of Distributism is to give people some acres of farmland. You work the land. You own private property. You own the means of production. You are self-sufficient. You are free. And ... well ... if you screw up and really need help, hey, it's Post-Scarcity society, and, yeah, we have robots in factories that just kind of build stuff, so -- if you really, really need it -- we can ship you a new tractor, or a load of seeds for next year. You won't starve. No one starves. But, for your own self-worth, we do expect you to produce goods in a vineyard, an apple orchard, or a dairy operation. Show your value. Make a contribution.
Slightly different observation:
I often say that we are on a bad path to a new feudal age. People like Obama want to be lords living in castles up on a hill. They are creating a world were we are serfs laboring in the fields. I don't want to be a serf.
Now, in the Middle Ages, serfs owed their lords labor. You grew food as best you could (and lost some in taxes) and in addition, the system of corvee labor required that peasants built Cathedrals and other structures for part of the year. Europe had a lot of really awesome architecture, in part, because serfs had to provide labor to their lord -- so, why not build Notre Dame?
I can see a future in which people act like the Amish and just get together to build barns for each other, or dance halls for their community, or ponds so that people can add more fish to their diet. It's kind of like serfs providing corvee labor -- but maybe it's more pragmatic than anything else. Provide value. Build a decent community.
In a post-scarcity world where robots to the necessary work, we may have to look for ways that human labor can be seen as a good and moral contribution to our society.
The alternative I worry about it that we all live in a ghetto and have EBT cards. Full Stop. End of story. That's your life.
That would be bad.
Last I heard, the heaviest worked serfs in England 600 years ago worked from 50-60 days to pay their rent, taxes, obligation to the laird, etc....
Last I looked, Tax Freedom Day (2012) was April 13th...
Using conventional unix Julian date conversion tools, that looks like 104 days.
And.... The aristocracy had to provide food and drink on feast days. Have you looked at how many feast days they got 600 years ago?
When is the last time your boss took you to lunch?
I'm not so sure about the serf thing. It's looking better all the time.
A fair point.
Only 30% of the judges have to be convinced that the software is actually a human? That’s just not very impressive. I never realized that the threshold specified by Turing was so low...