wlim@ai.mit.edu (William Y-P. Lim) (06/26/91)
[Here is a copy of a message I posted to comp.ai this morning. I forgot to include comp.ai.philosophy.---Willie] The current discussion on the inadequacy of the Turing Test reminds of some ideas I had while I was completing my PhD work. Rather than go into a long discussion on the topic (I've trying to get the full discussion written down for quite a while; may be now it is time to finally get it done), I propose that we use a very simple test: Have you and the "thing" in question play a non-violent, non-destructive game of "cat (you) and mouse (the 'thing')." The harder it is to catch the "thing," the smarter it is. Note: There apart from the requirements that game be non-violent and non-destructive (i.e. we don't want anybody get hurt), anything goes including lying, cheating, talking one's way out of the game, etc. Willie From wlim@ai.mit.edu Tue Jun 25 14:02:58 1991 From: wlim@ai.mit.edu (William Y-P. Lim) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: A replacement for the Turing Test Date: 25 Jun 91 11:18:48 GMT Distribution: comp Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab The current discussion on the inadequacy of the Turing Test reminds me of some ideas I had back in my PhD days. Rather than go into a long discussion on the topic (I've trying to get the full discussion written down for quite a while; may be now it is time to finally get it done), I propose that we use a very simple test: Have you and the "thing" in question play a non-violent, non-destructive game of "cat (you) and mouse (the 'thing')." The harder it is to catch the "thing," the smarter it is. Note: There apart from the requirements that game be non-violent and non-destructive (i.e. we don't want anybody get hurt), anything goes including lying, cheating, talking one's way out of the game, learning and adapting to the other party, etc. Willie wlim@ai.mit.edu (can read/post news) wlim@gdstech.grumman.com (can read but can't post news)