You’re comparing apples and oranges though. In the Turing test you are knowingly attempting to interrogate the computer to determine if it is a conscious thinking being or not. That’s quite different to engaging in a conversation with a specific context and on a very limited topic.
Furthermore the ’13 year old boy’ incident from 2014 was a very highly constrained version of the test with the rules heavily stacked in the chatbot’s favor. Modern chatbots can fulfill useful roles and interface systems, but they are a dead end in terms of achieving general purpose AI.
Kenneth Steinsays:
Turing knew what he was talking about. Language understanding is grounded not intellectually, but experientially. Think about it. No, really think about that.
Matt Fulkersonsays:
Besides Turing, Asimov was also a pretty sharp person. Daniel, do you believe enough researchers are putting effort into the ethics side of AI?
Second question: Even if they are, surely not everyone is. Will ethical AI’s win out over unethical ones?
Thanks for the nice perspective. At some point I’ll read John Nash’s game theory work to see how it may apply to the question.
Also, if people can show that ethical behavior wins out over unethical behavior (in their everyday lives), then we at least know that this is also possible for artificial intelligence.
Matt Fulkersonsays:
I have some loose philosophical arguments regarding how ethical collaboration may win if you’d like to take the discussion off line some time.
You’re comparing apples and oranges though. In the Turing test you are knowingly attempting to interrogate the computer to determine if it is a conscious thinking being or not. That’s quite different to engaging in a conversation with a specific context and on a very limited topic.
Furthermore the ’13 year old boy’ incident from 2014 was a very highly constrained version of the test with the rules heavily stacked in the chatbot’s favor. Modern chatbots can fulfill useful roles and interface systems, but they are a dead end in terms of achieving general purpose AI.
Turing knew what he was talking about. Language understanding is grounded not intellectually, but experientially. Think about it. No, really think about that.
Besides Turing, Asimov was also a pretty sharp person. Daniel, do you believe enough researchers are putting effort into the ethics side of AI?
Second question: Even if they are, surely not everyone is. Will ethical AI’s win out over unethical ones?
Please see http://lemire.me/blog/2015/11/02/is-artificial-intelligence-going-to-wipe-us-out-in-30-years/
Thanks for the nice perspective. At some point I’ll read John Nash’s game theory work to see how it may apply to the question.
Also, if people can show that ethical behavior wins out over unethical behavior (in their everyday lives), then we at least know that this is also possible for artificial intelligence.
I have some loose philosophical arguments regarding how ethical collaboration may win if you’d like to take the discussion off line some time.