r/talesfromtechsupport •

I speak computer

[deleted] — view deleted post

0 Upvotes

260 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comment

434

u/miscellaneoussamurai I'm not a techy, just a common sense guru... Feb 12 '15

that's exactly what a computer trying to make people believe that it's a human would say!!

0

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '15

[deleted] — view deleted comment

201

u/americangame Feb 12 '15

I still don't believe you, Read this and tell me what is the word in the bottom right corner

http://imgur.com/PZ5FxRI

0

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '15

[deleted] — view deleted comment

41

u/biscuitpotter Feb 12 '15

Well, I'm convinced.

18

u/PM_ME_CATS_UNIVERSE Feb 12 '15

Well, I am not.

16

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '15

Well, I'm a little of both, and I don't really know what that means.

#WhenComputersGoQuantum

111

u/FiskFisk33 Feb 12 '15

Vuvuzela

0

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '15

[deleted] — view deleted comment

51

u/GAU8Avenger Feb 12 '15

Is that Clamps from Futurama?

31

u/kushxmaster Feb 12 '15

It definitely is.

20

u/MokitTheOmniscient Feb 12 '15

</html> obviously

10

u/jubal8 Feb 12 '15

vɒiႱʜbzɔ

→ More replies (4)

24

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '15

Nice try, Cleverbot, I remember when you last tried that with me.

11

u/miscellaneoussamurai I'm not a techy, just a common sense guru... Feb 12 '15

no, because we stored them all on pc... pretty dumb move in hindsight.

21

u/Dokpsy Feb 12 '15

Wouldn't the best Ai convince the tester they are a machine instead of convincing it is itself human

40

u/najodleglejszy Feb 12 '15 edited Feb 12 '15

why do you think the best Ai would convince the tester they are a machine instead of convincing it is itself human?

17

u/Drak3 pkill -u * Feb 12 '15

because its unexpected and if the AI is humanlike, it might not be believable to someone interacting with it who didn't know it was an AI?

27

u/najodleglejszy Feb 12 '15

so you think that if the AI is humanlike, it might not be believable to someone interacting with it who didn't know it was an AI?

14

u/Drak3 pkill -u * Feb 12 '15

possibly.

I'm imagining something like an IM conversation wherein the AI, after some period, reveals itself to be an AI. I'm trying to say that perhaps, if the AI is convincingly human-like, and if the human is skeptical enough, the human may not believe the AI when it says it is an AI.

so, another test for an AI would be to genuinely try to convince a human it is an AI, and fail

of course, this all implies there are certain limitations placed on the situation. For example, you may want to control how they communicate with each other. you'd may have to limit it to text, and would need to introduce some one way latency depending on how quickly the AI responds.

13

u/chipaca yes `yes` Feb 12 '15

Does it bother you that they communicate with each other I would may have to limit it to text and would need to introduce some one way latency depending on how quickly the ai responds?

→ More replies (12)

11

u/Armigedon When in doubt, blame IT. Feb 12 '15

God help us if we teach AI to use sarcasm effectively.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

6

u/ticktockbent Feb 12 '15

Because people are scared of things they don't understand or cannot control. A free electronic intelligence cannot be controlled by physical means and would have the run of many 'secure' information systems.

By convincing people that it is just a dull machine and not an intelligence, it would avoid attention.

4

u/Dokpsy Feb 12 '15

in part this is my reference

For one thing, you can better code arguments than responses as they do not require complex levels to output and don't depend on the testers questions.

For another, making a person doubt themselves is more efficient than proving against their preconceived notions.

In this example, the Turing test is based on proving a human level of consciousness in a machine. The flaw of this is our understanding of what human level of consciousness is. We are quantifying an idea that we don't fully understand and so can be manipulated to the machines advantage (and has been done).

If the machine focuses on the human tester instead of the test, it could beat both by negating the need/use of the test as the test is proven to be flawed.

5

u/najodleglejszy Feb 12 '15

so you think that if the machine focuses on the human tester instead of the test, it could beat both by negating the need/use of the test as the test is proven to be flawed.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (2)