Path: utzoo!utgpu!bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!bnr-di!mayoung
From: mayoung@bnr-di.UUCP (Mark Young)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Turing test and Chinese room
Summary: artificial stupidity
Message-ID: <156@bnr-di.UUCP>
Date: 21 Mar 89 15:31:45 GMT
References: <53875@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> <1441@husc6.harvard.edu>
Organization: DI, Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Ont.
Lines: 16

In article <1441@husc6.harvard.edu>, reiter@babbage.harvard.edu (Ehud Reiter) writes:
> A machine that could pass the Turing test would have to be programmed to do
> as badly as humans at multiplying, probabilistic reasoning, and predictive
> tasks.

This is not strictly true.  The machine would only have to be able to
emulate this behaviour.  Aftir all, I can imatate a guy who cant spel to
good, even if my own spelling is (reasonably) good.  Remember that the
point of the TT was for the machine to _fool_ the observer into thinking
it was a person.  If the machine feels that giving the wrong answer to a
multiplication problem will help it in this task, it will give the wrong
answer.
> 
> 					Ehud Reiter

Mark Young