gcj%qmc-ori.uucp@CS.UCL.AC.UK (03/13/86)
Thanks to Eugene Miya (Vol 4 # 50) for pointing out that Turing had proposed a machine system could act as the adjudicator. I have also been made aware, by Eugene's message, that the original Turing test involves two parties - man/woman or (wo)man/machine - as well as an adjudicator ( - "The Imitation Game"). The initial discussion, ie is it possible to decide on man/woman differences of *intelligence*, really does begin to look slightly strange, especially in the light of Turing's own sexual orientation. In terms of experience of sex, man and woman differ fundamentally. However, in terms of ``human experience related to intelligence'', (see Vol 4 # 41), is there any difference between man and woman? Given that the Imitation Game now seems suspect (to me), what about the extension to (wo)man/machine comparison? Surely the differences of ``experience'' and hence ``intelligence'', between (wo)man and machine, must be open to examination by a *suitably intelligent adjudicator*? Hmmm... (getting a bit recursive...) ``Life, don't talk to me about life!'' - Marvin the Paranoid Android. This quotation is from "The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy" by Douglas Adams. He sees the Planet Earth as a giant AI system, which is trying to find a The Question to The Ultimate Answer. Nice one. The Earth system was designed by Deep Thought, the computer which came up with The Answer - 42. Gordon Joly ARPA: gcj%qmc-ori@ucl-cs.arpa UUCP: ...!ukc!qmc-cs!qmc-ori!gcj