Turing Test - Daniel Dennett

The entire video:
http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/the-science-studio/daniel-dennet

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Daniel
• Dennett
• turing
• test
• computers
• AI

[666arzin]

Hey Kid! I'ma Computa! Stop all the downloadin'!

[kid29a]

good points. many people writing "first" on YouTube definitely wouldn't pass the Turing test.

[bribribri56]

some sweet info here

[ArxVirtus]

Youtube fails the Turing Test. In the related videos list.....What does a boob-a-licious Chinese girl have to do with the Turing Test?

[khijasmith]

very interesting video thanks

[HeyHeyHarmonicaLuke]

@packe777 wtf? Sky hooks and cranes is a great analogy for magic and non magic explanations, and it wasn't coined by Dennett anyway.

[packe777]

Gregory Chaitin work's on Godel's theorem has finally buried all this positivist dogma of Dennett, Churchland and similar. The Omega number, or Chaitin's constant isn't computable at all. It is irreducible complex algorithm, that is true just by accident. I'ts compatible with Penrose's ORCH-OR, as the platonic information (pattern) embedded at the Plank scale. The implications are mind-boggling. And still today, you have automata like Dennett talking nonsense.

[packe777]

@HomuncuIus His "intuition pumps", "deflationary accounts:", "Sky Cranes/hooks" theories are something only smoked-up person in a bad trip could think of.

[HomuncuIus]

Dennett's theories are absolute nonsense.

[Serpico261]

@Grafight23 youre right! An MIT prof of cs even said that big blue had no strategy capabilities, well i dont know if this is true, maybe big blue planned his moves only a few levels deep. But it is very simple for a computer to win against humans in a game like chess. I once played against a chess computer and i will never again,its like playing with a mind reader, its so frustrating. Today chess players are ranked by how long and good they can last against a machine, cause they wont win anyways

[Grafight23]

@Serpico261 Well said, Deep Blue is a computation powerhouse which doesn't learn. It searches EVERY allowed move and counter-move, even the stupid ones, and will pick the one with the most chances of winning. After 3 or 4 moves, Deep blue can solve to checkmate, regardless of what the human opponent does. At that point, it's just a math problem with a solution, not a "game" anymore.

[Serpico261]

@Grafight23 i absolutely agree with you. A static only program can not be considered as AI. I think even if you have an intelligent algorithm, the program should collect data and build heuristic knowledge. In the other hand could a human also decide not to learn? Or take the IBM chess player program, im not sure if this program plays intelligent...cause its so fast that it does NOT NEED or almost not, productive laziness. it would need hours to make a move if it would calculate fast like humans