Does Spectrum people pass Touring test?
This is the Touring test: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test
Basically is a test about Artificial Intelligence. I'm pointing out that because I see in it the same kind of "racism" as people had (have) about autism. Basically the test is as follow:
A - robot
B - Human
C - Human esaminator.
C don't know if A or B is the robot. If C can find wich one is the robot then the test is not passed.
People said to me so much time that my mind is "robotic" or that I "don't think like others" or things like that, so I asked myself: "Can I pass touring test?".
If you look at the link there is a discussion about it (not about Spectrum). Look at "Weaknesses of the test" subtitle.
P.S.
A cool quote: "planes are tested by how well they fly, not by comparing them to birds"
EDIT:
Probably I was saying it in the wrong words.
The question is: suppose that you put under a screen an NT and a AS. Then you say to the "operator": "one of them is a computer. Wich one?" Do you think we will have a 50% chance, more or less to be "labeled" as computer?
_________________
Planes are tested by how well they fly, not by comparing them to birds.
Last edited by Nightsun on 05 Oct 2009, 9:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Basically is a test about Artificial Intelligence. I'm pointing out that because I see in it the same kind of "racism" as people had (have) about autism. Basically the test is as follow:
A - robot
B - Human
C - Human esaminator.
C don't know if A or B is the robot. If C can find wich one is the robot then the test is not passed.
People said to me so much time that my mind is "robotic" or that I "don't think like others" or things like that, so I asked myself: "Can I pass touring test?".
If you look at the link there is a discussion about it (not about Spectrum). Look at "Weaknesses of the test" subtitle.
P.S.
A cool quote: "planes are tested by how well they fly, not by comparing them to birds"
All living things are robots (of a sort). Living robots are a lot more complicated than the kind humans make.
ruveyn
fiddlerpianist
Veteran
Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,821
Location: The Autistic Hinterlands
Probably I was saying it in the wrong words.
The question is: suppose that you put under a screen an NT and a AS. Then you say to the "operator": "one of them is a computer. Wich one?" Do you think we will have a 50% chance, more or less to be "labeled" as computer?
_________________
Planes are tested by how well they fly, not by comparing them to birds.
Walking around was a thing that helped distinguish animal and plants for a long time. Then they understand that is wrong.
_________________
Planes are tested by how well they fly, not by comparing them to birds.
We will pass SME test probably better than NT
http://en.allexperts.com/e/s/su/subject ... g_test.htm
ALICE: http://alicebot.blogspot.com/
MR.Mind (convince him you are not a computer): http://www.mrmind.com/mrmind3
_________________
Planes are tested by how well they fly, not by comparing them to birds.
fiddlerpianist
Veteran
Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,821
Location: The Autistic Hinterlands
Walking around was a thing that helped distinguish animal and plants for a long time. Then they understand that is wrong.
Wow, you know an apple tree that walks around?
So the hypothesis is somehow that people with AS are less human? I'm trying to figure out what you are driving at.
_________________
"That leap of logic should have broken his legs." - Janissy
No. I feel as human as anybody. The hypothesis is that:
Human way of thinking leaded to Turing test. If Autistic people have more difficult passing a turing test: Human way of thinking is wrong -> Turing test is wrong.
Let's say in other words. All that A.I. <-> Turing test thing. Take an alien, a very intelligent alien, with a great society, very advanced and make him do the turing test. Does he will pass it?
It was more a phylosophical question about how difficult is for people to find out humanity and intelligence when its exposed differently from what they expect.
_________________
Planes are tested by how well they fly, not by comparing them to birds.
The problem is you can't base intelligence on things like the Turing test. It's assuming a major fallacy that your ability to communicate is related to your ability to discern concepts and ideas. An intelligent extra-terrestrial may very well have communication simpler than that of a humble toad, yet have no difficulty outpacing us in technological innovation.
We've been seeing the impact of this concept in the Raven's Progressive Matrices, and what it shows about autism when compared to standard IQ tests.
For us to determine the intelligence of anything, we need to completely ignore language, and instead sit back and watch. Does this creature use tools? Is it capable of putting things together in innovative ways? Is it capable of learning and developing abstract concepts?
If we can look at it from the perspective of intellect, rather than complex communications, we'll get a much more accurate picture. Dolphins have a language more complex than ours, yet I'd hardly consider them 'intelligent life'.
Yeah, we're not really talking about intelligence here, but "humanity"--whatever quality NTs see as "human", that chatbots and the like don't have.
I think possibly some autistics might fail the test. I might've failed it back when I was a kid, before I learned how to do conversations. The give-and-take you get when you're talking to somebody can be pretty difficult for autistics. That doesn't mean they're not human; just that they don't communicate it to others. Think of it as a sort of "false negative", like the "false positive" of a computer that passes the test.
Most chatbots now, when they make up what they'll say next, are responding just to what you said to them, by keyword most likely. They'll search their entire database for something appropriate to say next. That's not like a human (well, most humans); humans will have a conversational topic in mind, and search the things that are in that topic and most closely related, in their own framework of ideas, to whatever the person before them has said to them in the last half-hour, not just the last statement. Then there's other complications, like words with more than one meaning, sarcasm, metaphor, simile, slang...
The one thing humans are really, really good at that computers suck at is all sorts of pattern-matching. So even as a kid, before I figured out conversations, when I was still just using pattern-matching (i.e., saying what I thought matched the particular situation I was in) I was probably doing better than the best modern AIs at imitating conversation.
_________________
Reports from a Resident Alien:
http://chaoticidealism.livejournal.com
Autism Memorial:
http://autism-memorial.livejournal.com
Well actually I view it more drastically. In Turing mind humanity and artificial intelligence are the same and humanity is based in comunication so humanity = intelligence = comunication. It's shocking to think that a good mind like turing could have thinked something like that.
By the way dolphins seems intelligent.
_________________
Planes are tested by how well they fly, not by comparing them to birds.
...
The one thing humans are really, really good at that computers suck at is all sorts of pattern-matching. So even as a kid, before I figured out conversations, when I was still just using pattern-matching (i.e., saying what I thought matched the particular situation I was in) I was probably doing better than the best modern AIs at imitating conversation.
"computers suck at is all sorts of pattern-matching" because they were not programmed for that, not yet.
By 10 years old, i would fail the test, but today, i would pass.
About "humanity = intelligence = comunication"
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Are a portion of people on the autism spectrum asexual? |
20 Apr 2024, 8:32 am |
Is Crash Bandicoot on the spectrum? |
05 Mar 2024, 9:14 am |
Arizona initiative “Vote the Spectrum” |
03 Mar 2024, 11:41 am |
Medical Study: Role of Gut Microbiome in Autism Spectrum Dis |
08 Apr 2024, 4:13 pm |