X-Message-Number: 3650
From: "Peter C. McCluskey" <>
Newsgroups: sci.cryonics
Subject: Re: awareness etc.
Date: 9 Jan 1995 04:09:55 GMT
Message-ID: <3eqcuj$>
References: <3eksk4$>

 writes (in <3eksk4$>):
>First, an umpteenth  effort to explain why the Turing Test is
>nonsense--neither necessary nor sufficient to prove humanity or LAWKI
>(life-as-we-know-it):

>Even some presently existing programs can fool some people some of the time.
> In any duel between a clever programmer (or even a very stupid but massive
>and very fast computer) and a maybe-not-so-clever auditor, the programmer
>might win. Therefore passing the Turing Test is not a sufficient condition.

 This is only true if you put strict limits on the duration of the Turing
test or on the type of questions that are asked. No existing program can
come close to imitating a normal human if a competent questioner asks
several hours worth of unrestricted questions. I see no reason to doubt
that a sufficiently competent questioner asking a very detailed set of
questions can determine whether or not there are any differences between
the digital mind and a typical human mind.
 Of course you can claim that this test may miss some quality that you
consider important, but until you can identify this quality, I will
assume that it is something I am willing to leave behind when I upload.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter McCluskey |  | http://www.rahul.net/pcm | 
"I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, doctor, and I'm happy to state
that I've finally won out over it." - Elwood P. Dowd (in the movie Harvey)

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3650