

Almost human - bdfh42
http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2008/10/almost_human.php

======
hapless
Eliza was more convincing. (And it comes free with my editor.)

------
geuis
sorry, elbot isn't any better a chatbot than any others that have come out
over the years. Started talking with it and it just started giving the same
nonsensical responses that are typical with these things.

Also, people need to get off the Turing test as this line in the sand that has
to be crossed to meet some 1950's concept of AI. Actual human-equivalent AI
will need to be judged by modern concepts of neurology and psychology.

~~~
rms
From the first comment on the blog post:

>While I'm at it though, I'd like to point out that I don't think the "Turing
test" is meant to be an actual test at all. To me, the point of the Turing
test is as a philosophical proposition: if, when the communication interface
is limited to a bidirection terminal, the other end is indistinguishable from
a human, then we could conclude that the other end is intelligent. Since each
response is simply an iterated (i.e. stateful) function of the previous
response, it follows that intelligent machines are possible. It doesn't tell
us anything about how to create the function, though.

