To clarify: I’m not talking about the popular conception of the Turing test as something like the Voight-Kampff test, meant to catch rogue AIs—but Turing’s original test, meant for AI designers to evaluate their own machines. In particular, I’m assuming the designers know their machine well enough to distinguish between a true inability and a feigned one (or to construct the test in a way that motivates the machine to make a genuine attempt).

And examples of human inabilities might be learning a language that violates the patterns of natural human languages, or engaging in reflexive group behavior the way starlings or fish schools do.

  • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    The humans and machines that are behind the curtain have to be motivated to try and replicate a human

    In a Turing test, yes. What I’m suggesting is to change the motivation, to see if the machine fails like a human even when motivated not to.