Path: news.net.uni-c.dk!howland.erols.net!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail
From: Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org>
Newsgroups: comp.ai.neural-nets,comp.lang.apl,comp.lang.awk,comp.lang.beta,comp.lang.cobol,comp.lang.dylan,comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Einstein's Riddle
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 12:59:13 -0500
Organization: The Hectic Eclectic
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <3AB648F1.AA8F446F@ieee.org>
References: <VIPq6.396633$ge4.138469576@news2.rdc2.tx.home.com> <3AACB567.A59B8497@Azonic.co.nz> <3AACE6CF.7F05484D@ieee.org> <0W8r6.178$fo5.14165@news.get2net.dk> <3AAD60F3.120F284A@ieee.org> <3AAE371A.2F9F596F@brazee.net> <98m43a$fe2$1@localhost.localdomain> <3AAFB378.AB166E8C@ieee.org> <98q3f1$bid$1@localhost.localdomain> <3AB0DFC6.FC100A64@ieee.org> <98sq19$ton$1@localhost.localdomain> <3AB61B58.CF536ECA@brazee.net> <3AB6273D.E6C18536@ix.netcom.com> <995csm$qhf$1@localhost.localdomain>
Reply-To: jya@ieee.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: UmFuZG9tSVY2mTxUtPxq2UFKIU0TNTnohmP58qMNl24Ns+JtXsHLRXsp6oElJadp
X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Mar 2001 17:59:25 GMT
X-Mailer:  Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language:  en
Xref: news.net.uni-c.dk comp.ai.neural-nets:67648 comp.lang.apl:29468 comp.lang.awk:17261 comp.lang.beta:12803 comp.lang.cobol:102929 comp.lang.dylan:24237 comp.lang.forth:78696

aph@redhat.invalid wrote:
> 
> : Howard Brazee wrote:
> :> But if you're writing an AI application, Turing's is probably not
> :> relevant.
> 
> Sure, that's true.  Turing's test doesn't exist to help people who
> write so-called AI applications.
> 
> <speculation about Turing deleted>
> 
> J Thomas <jethomas@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> : Incidentally, I've seen some slight evidence that to pass the Turing
> : test it helps to have the program simulate some sort of raving bigot.
> 
> It's easy for a computer realistically to mimic deranged people:
> Parry, for example.  But the examiner wouldn't believe the program was
> intelligent.  How would that be a pass?
> 
> : So apart from the philosophical pooint that it probably isn't workable
> : to say "intelligence is whatever humans do and not what anything else
> : does"
> 
> That would be an unintelligent point to make, which is presumably why
> no-one has made it!
> 
> Andrew.

No one made it here, which is part of what I enjoy about this group.
Unfortunately, it is often the unstated axiom behind the changing
definition of intelligence that some philosophers adopt. No one claims
any longer that intelligence is exhibited when a good game of chess is
played.

Jerry
-- 
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------