Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!uwvax!rutgers!gatech!hubcap!mrspock
From: mrspock@hubcap.UUCP (Steve Benz)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: The future of AI - my opinion
Message-ID: <1348@hubcap.UUCP>
Date: 11 Apr 88 01:56:48 GMT
References: <2070012@otter.hple.hp.com>
Organization: Clemson University, Clemson, SC
Lines: 29

From article <2070012@otter.hple.hp.com>, by cdfk@otter.hple.hp.com (Caroline Knight):
> The Turing Test is hardly adequate - I'm surprised that people
> still bring it up...
> 
> The day when we have won is the inverse of the Turing Test - someone
> will say this has to be a human not a computer - a computer 
> couldn't have made such a crass mistake...
>
> ...Caroline Knight

  Isn't this exactly the Turing test (rather than the inverse?)
A computer being just as human as a human?  Well, either way,
the point is taken.

  In fact, I agree with it.  I think that in order for a machine to be
convincing as a human, it would need to have the bad qualities of a human
as well as the good ones, i.e.  it would have to be occasionally stupid,
arrogant, ignorant, etc.&soforth.

  So, who needs that?  Who is going to sit down and (intentionally)
write a program that has the capacity to be stupid, arrogant, or ignorant?

  I think the goal of AI is somewhat askew of the Turing test.
If a rational human develops an intelligent computer, it will
almost certainly have a personality quite distinct from any human.

				- Steve
				mrspock@hubcap.clemson.edu
				...!gatech!hubcap!mrspock