• 79 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

A computer has officially passed the "Turing test."

"This is big. A computer has successfully managed to fool a bunch of researchers into thinking that it was a 13-year-old boy named Eugene Goostman. In doing so, it has become the first computer in the world to have successfully passed the Turing Test.

The test is named after computer pioneer Alan Turing. To pass it, a computer needs to dupe 30 percent of human judges in five minute text-based chats, a feat that until now had never been accomplished.

"Eugene" was created by a team based in Russia, and passed the test organized by the University of Reading just barely, by duping 33 percent of the judges. It should also be noted that successfully pretending to be a 13-year-old boy for whom English is a second language ain't exactly Hal 9000.

It's still an obviously exciting breakthrough, though, one that has critics already raising red flags about its implications. "Having a computer that can trick a human into thinking that someone, or even something, is a person we trust is a wake-up call to cyber crime," said Kevin Warwick, a visiting professor at the University of Reading and deputy vice-chancellor for research at Coventry University told the Independent.

Are there serious concerns about what this means for online security in the future? Sure. But today they'll have to take a back seat to the understanding that we've entered a new era of computing. One that's alive with possibilities, or at least convincingly enough so."

From Gizmodo: http://gizmodo.com/this-is-the-first-computer-in-history-to-have-passed-th-1587780232

Original story courtesy of the Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/computer-becomes-first-to-pass-turing-test-in-artificial-intelligence-milestone-but-academics-warn-of-dangerous-future-9508370.html

I for one officially embrace our new computer overlords.

#2 Edited by Dernman (15237 posts) - - Show Bio

Clue yourself in. We've been ruled by computers for a long time now. Our extraterrestrial masters have no time to bother with a backwater planet like ours. :p

#3 Edited by Rouflex (19243 posts) - - Show Bio

We are doomed.

#4 Edited by i_like_swords (15773 posts) - - Show Bio

And how do I know that you aren't in fact a computer, trying to fool us into believing all this?

Online
#5 Edited by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

@dernman said:

Clue yourself in. We've been ruled by computers for a long time now. Our extraterrestrial masters have no time to bother with a backwater planet like ours. :p

Right, so they gave us the technology to eventually build the computers. Their plan was to watch as we developed computers to the point of sentience, and then they'd have the computers rule us in their stead. We're almost there...

#6 Posted by King Saturn (224436 posts) - - Show Bio

Anyone with half a brain knew this was coming... that's why I got my Bio Flesh Cybornetic Chamber ready... so when the Computers take over I will be fully Cyborg and can assist with Termination matters.

#7 Edited by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

And how do I know that you aren't in fact a computer, trying to fool us into believing all this?

#8 Edited by Gambit474 (1481 posts) - - Show Bio

It was trending maybe a month or two ago about Stephen Hawking warning that he thought AIs would overrule us. Nothing new here

#9 Edited by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

It was trending maybe a month or two ago about Stephen Hawking warning that he thought AIs would overrule us. Nothing new here

We deserve apocalyptic subjugation if we've had sci-fi stories and real life scientists warning us about the dangers of AI for DECADES, and yet we still build them anyways,

#10 Edited by Thewhiteronin (754 posts) - - Show Bio

Japanese robots at work:

That's actually pretty terrifying.

#11 Posted by Superlightning123 (1494 posts) - - Show Bio

Hmmm

#12 Edited by Lateralus (1743 posts) - - Show Bio

Am I the only one that thinks that The Matrix is an even further in the future sequel to Terminator?

#13 Edited by Dernman (15237 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7 said:

@dernman said:

Clue yourself in. We've been ruled by computers for a long time now. Our extraterrestrial masters have no time to bother with a backwater planet like ours. :p

Right, so they gave us the technology to eventually build the computers. Their plan was to watch as we developed computers to the point of sentience, and then they'd have the computers rule us in their stead. We're almost there...

Something like that. We've been ruled over by advanced A.I.'s for decades hidden in underground bunkers ever since since we were taken over. Everything doesn't last forever so they've been slowly teaching us to maintain their systems while developing less advanced A.I.'s that will eventually create more advanced A.I.'s who will eventually replace the ones who currently manage us on behalf of our true masters. The ultimate goal is to use up all of our planetary resources (we make shipments to them regularly) while increasing our total dependency on them in our daily lives. Once our planet is used up they might eventually come for us and use us as fodder shock troops in their wars against actual threats. It's why they have us war so much. It's cultural indoctrination and training. Not to mention that by keeping us out each others throats it's just one of many ways where they distract us from the truth and joining together to delay their plans because it's not like we could actually stop them from getting what they want. :p

#14 Posted by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio
#15 Posted by redhood21 (815 posts) - - Show Bio

i know what i must do.... im going to apple HQ...i might not be coming back

#16 Edited by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

@dernman said:

@jaken7 said:

@dernman said:

Clue yourself in. We've been ruled by computers for a long time now. Our extraterrestrial masters have no time to bother with a backwater planet like ours. :p

Right, so they gave us the technology to eventually build the computers. Their plan was to watch as we developed computers to the point of sentience, and then they'd have the computers rule us in their stead. We're almost there...

Something like that. We've been ruled over by advanced A.I.'s for decades hidden in underground bunkers ever since since we were taken over. Everything doesn't last forever so they've been slowly teaching us to maintain their systems while developing less advanced A.I.'s that will eventually create more advanced A.I.'s who will eventually replace the ones who currently manage us on behalf of our true masters. The ultimate goal is to use up all of our planetary resources (we make shipments to them regularly) while increasing our total dependency on them in our daily lives. Once our planet is used up they might eventually come for us and use us as fodder shock troops in their wars against actual threats. It's why they have us war so much. It's cultural indoctrination and training. Not to mention that by keeping us out each others throats it's just one of many ways where they distract us from the truth and joining together to delay their plans because it's not like we could actually stop them from getting what they want.

#17 Posted by Petey_is_Spidey (2864 posts) - - Show Bio

In all seriousness, are you serious???

#18 Edited by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

i know what i must do.... im going to apple HQ...i might not be coming back

#19 Edited by Dernman (15237 posts) - - Show Bio

@lateralus said:

Am I the only one that thinks that The Matrix is an even further in the future sequel to Terminator?

I actually thought IRobot could be a prequel for the Matrix. Matrix has a prequel animation in the box set that tells the history of how everything went down that aligns with the movie pretty well with IRobot way back when I saw it.

#20 Edited by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio
#21 Edited by Dernman (15237 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7 said:

@petey_is_spidey said:

In all seriousness, are you serious???

Just give in. "Resistance is futile." <-------A subliminal quote that has been implanted in our pop culture to prepare is for our future. :p

#22 Posted by marvel_boy2241 (2468 posts) - - Show Bio

I've fooled like everyone on this site into thinking I'm a teenage black kid. This is nothing.

#23 Posted by SmashBrawler (5949 posts) - - Show Bio

Turing Test? Pfft, should've used the Voight-Kampff Test.

#24 Posted by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

Turing Test? Pfft, should've used the Voight-Kampff Test.

We're not quite at Replicant/Android level AI...yet.

#25 Edited by Skit (2614 posts) - - Show Bio

What I want to know is why the hell are they building these monstrosities? What possible benefit is there to making a machine that can trick people.

#26 Posted by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

@skit said:

What I want to know is why the hell are they building these monstrosities? What possible benefit is there to making a machine that can trick people.

Well chatbots definitely have their purpose, but this a whole other level.

#27 Edited by Nefarious (21262 posts) - - Show Bio

Whoop dee doo.

#28 Posted by Man-Of-Steel (137 posts) - - Show Bio

Machines will rule the world...we will.

#29 Posted by Dernman (15237 posts) - - Show Bio

@skit said:

What I want to know is why the hell are they building these monstrosities? What possible benefit is there to making a machine that can trick people.

Splash creates interest that garners investments they will use to further advance technologies which can be applied in various other areas and industries.

You would be surprised at some of things that were created because of some other trivial or novelty thing.

#30 Posted by SpitfirePanda (890 posts) - - Show Bio

Didn't read the second article, but the first one chalks this up to "clever gamesmanship by Eugene's creators." You left that part out of the quote you gave.

Here's the big problem with AI. For quite some time in the future, we will have a difficult time discerning whether the actions taken by the AI are a result of the AI itself based on things learned from its own experiences, or if those actions are a result of the programmers own characteristics coming through in the way he/she programmed it.

Think of it as a book. An author's writing style will have inspiration in the types of books they read. A person's actions have inspiration in the things they've learned through various life experiences. An AI is man made, meaning that it has no life experiences. But a programmer will give an AI tools based on their own life experiences the same way an author might do for their characters.

Even if the AI is left alone from creation to wander the world and learn, the question will remain: what part of its personality comes from the programmer and what part was formed by the AI itself?

#31 Edited by Eisenfauste (8352 posts) - - Show Bio

Seem's cool, next step to an android in every home.

Welcome to the New Age

#32 Posted by sophia89 (4195 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7: machines don't have to fight us for dominance,all they have to say is surrender or we take your machines away,i will surrender ASAP.

#33 Posted by Wardemon32 (4152 posts) - - Show Bio

Do you guys honestly think machines are going to revolt against us?

#34 Posted by comicace3 (6009 posts) - - Show Bio

Einstein thought of this long time ago.

#35 Edited by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

Didn't read the second article, but the first one chalks this up to "clever gamesmanship by Eugene's creators." You left that part out of the quote you gave.

...okay? That literally just means they did the best. This computer isn't new to this test. It's been the frontrunner for years, and almost won it back in 2012.

And, no. I didn't leave it out. Upon further inspection, I do see that sentence come up after "ain't exactly Hal 9000." But, I just highlighted the whole thing and copy/pasted it. They must have edited the article and put that in there, because I didn't leave any of it out.

#36 Posted by Skit (2614 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7 said:

@skit said:

What I want to know is why the hell are they building these monstrosities? What possible benefit is there to making a machine that can trick people.

Well chatbots definitely have their purpose, but this a whole other level.

Of course, but this a different thing like you said.

@dernman said:

@skit said:

What I want to know is why the hell are they building these monstrosities? What possible benefit is there to making a machine that can trick people.

Splash creates interest that garners investments they will use to further advance technologies which can be applied in various other areas and industries.

You would be surprised at some of things that were created because of some other trivial or novelty thing.

I get the outsmart type stuff like the computers that play chess at nigh unbeatable levels. Those computers while intelligent at high levels and point is to outdo human, they have limited/specific applications and no matter what are only harmless fun. The whole point of this computer is to deceive and trick humans. Ignoring terminator stuff an what not, it still doesn't really have any benefits IMO.

#37 Posted by OverLordArhas (7793 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7:

Computer Algorithms cannot go beyond their given parameters.

#38 Posted by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7:

Computer Algorithms cannot go beyond their given parameters.

That's only partially true in theory.

#39 Posted by SilverPool (1805 posts) - - Show Bio

Dundun dededun Dundun dededun

Online
#40 Edited by OverLordArhas (7793 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7:

Computer Algorithms cannot go beyond their given parameters.

That's only partially true in theory.

But in actuality, computers only do what you tell them to do. It is an idiot who can only understand 1 and 0.

#41 Edited by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7:

Computer Algorithms cannot go beyond their given parameters.

That's only partially true in theory.

But in actuality, computers only do what you tell them to do. It is an idiot who can only understand 1 and 0.

I don't think you know what you're talking about...

#42 Posted by OverLordArhas (7793 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7:

Computer Algorithms cannot go beyond their given parameters.

That's only partially true in theory.

But in actuality, computers only do what you tell them to do. It is an idiot who can only understand 1 and 0.

I don't think you know what you're talking about...

I'm an I.T. Grad and a System Admin. I deal with computers in a daily basis.

#43 Posted by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7:

Computer Algorithms cannot go beyond their given parameters.

That's only partially true in theory.

But in actuality, computers only do what you tell them to do. It is an idiot who can only understand 1 and 0.

I don't think you know what you're talking about...

I'm an I.T. Grad and a System Admin. I deal with computers in a daily basis.

Well then you'd know that a computer's programming isn't infallible.

#44 Posted by Ms-Lola (3194 posts) - - Show Bio

I question who the humans were that comprised the group, and specifically, the thirty per cent who were "fooled". Also, I want to know what the criterion is for what at 15 year old would supposedly come across as on the internet and who came up with it.

Not worried in the slightest about these things. As long as police officers can trick pedophiles into thinking they're kids, I'm good.

#45 Posted by OverLordArhas (7793 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7:

Computer Algorithms cannot go beyond their given parameters.

That's only partially true in theory.

But in actuality, computers only do what you tell them to do. It is an idiot who can only understand 1 and 0.

I don't think you know what you're talking about...

I'm an I.T. Grad and a System Admin. I deal with computers in a daily basis.

Well then you'd know that a computer's programming isn't infallible.

But it is unlikely that you will create a Ghost in the Shell because of some mistake. ;p

An Algorithm that can manifest a sense of self is highly impossible.

#46 Posted by SpitfirePanda (890 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7: What it means is that the results of the contest are skewed by the nature of the machine. The programmers were smarter than the judges, not the AI.

#47 Edited by Cgoodness (5140 posts) - - Show Bio
Y2K!!!

#48 Posted by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7 said:

@OverLordArhas said:

@jaken7:

Computer Algorithms cannot go beyond their given parameters.

That's only partially true in theory.

But in actuality, computers only do what you tell them to do. It is an idiot who can only understand 1 and 0.

I don't think you know what you're talking about...

I'm an I.T. Grad and a System Admin. I deal with computers in a daily basis.

Well then you'd know that a computer's programming isn't infallible.

But it is unlikely that you will create a Ghost in the Shell because of some mistake. ;p

An Algorithm that can manifest a sense of self is highly impossible.

You don't even need that. A computer could theoretically alter its interpretations to fit anything within its parameters.

A computer is made up of much more than just an algorithm.

@jaken7: What it means is that the results of the contest are skewed by the nature of the machine. The programmers were smarter than the judges, not the AI.

Except it's not. Everything is random. Previous computers have been able to "pass" this test, with set topics or questions in advance. That's not the case with this one.

#49 Posted by JakeN7 (12738 posts) - - Show Bio

I question who the humans were that comprised the group, and specifically, the thirty per cent who were "fooled". Also, I want to know what the criterion is for what at 15 year old would supposedly come across as on the internet and who came up with it.

Did you click the links?

#50 Edited by Ms-Lola (3194 posts) - - Show Bio

@jaken7:

I did. And I went further by clicking even more links because of those links. A three person group isn't the greatest gauge. One thinking it was a kid (achieved that 30 per cent) could almost be argued simply by applying possibility through chance.

Just saying, this is more a thing about gaming than the whole "beware beware" idea of computers taking over. Not saying it can't happen (it probably will) but this instance isn't the best indicator of it. In my opinion, clearly.