Mostxlnt!Jan 7
evacide
All that the Turing Test proves is that human are much, much stupider than Alan Turing ever suspected.
Jan 6 at 8:49pmWeb
Show threadWombatadonJan 6
@evacide
"Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here"
Show threadOlivierJan 6
Thanks @evacide. I needed a good laugh 😁
Show threadDarwin WoodkaJan 6

@evacide

to be fair computers were dumber then

Show threadJoshua BarrettoJan 6
@evacide Autistic man chronically underestimates the extent to which neurotypical people anthropomorphise machines that flatter them?
Show threadevacideJan 6
@jsbarretto Weird, I know.
Show threadPseudonymous Jan 6

@jsbarretto
@evacide

They played this for laughs in the video game Soma. An autistic researcher figures out a way to put a copy of the human mind into a simulated reality, then she's surprised when the other humans start committing suicide "to ensure continuity when their soul goes into the machine." Sorry, not laughs. Soma is a horror game about an apocalypse. Not for laughs. 

Show threadJoshua BarrettoJan 6
@VictimOfSimony @evacide I think I have heard about this one from a Jacob Geller video! Sounds like an interesting thing to play.
Show threadPseudonymous Jan 6

@jsbarretto
@evacide

The story unfortunately has that "protagonist less intelligent than the audience" problem often seen in horror. The game has a lot to do with stealth and investigation. They do a lot of "identity horror" around the idea of copying minds into places they don't belong. 

Show threadJoshua BarrettoJan 6
@VictimOfSimony @evacide Do I recall that one of the central themes is the question of the hard problem of consciousness and the impossibility of telling whether identity transfer has happened in someone else?
Show threadPseudonymous Jan 6

@jsbarretto
@evacide

One of the moral choices is, "the researcher got you to copy your mind into a robot that will go do a task you can't, and now that task has been completed... do you let the copy live?" 

Show threadMarsh RayJan 6

@jsbarretto @evacide If you're going to call a man 'autistic', and remark on the irony of (your mischaracterization of) his work, I think you should probably read it first:

https://courses.cs.umbc.edu/471/papers/turing.pdf

Show threadJoshua BarrettoJan 6
@marshray @evacide I am making light-hearted humour about the silliness of those claiming AI sentience, why would you read my post and assume I'm attacking Turing...?
Show threadMarsh RayJan 6

@jsbarretto @evacide You're claiming (with little basis) that a man who was "fatally" persecuted in life for being different was 'autistic', then using him as a straw-man to "make light-hearted humor".

To do this you have to completely misrepresent his work, which is still very relevant 3/4 of a century later. In reality, humans held out against the machines a bit longer than he predicted in 1950.
The concept of "sentience" is not mentioned.

That is why I think that you should read it.

Show threadJoshua BarrettoJan 6
@marshray @evacide I am very familiar with Turing's work. With respect, I think you're taking what I said far, far too literally. In hindsight the word 'fatally' was poorly chosen: it was intended in reference to the impossibility of administering a fair Turing test in the modern day and had nothing to do with Turing's life. Perhaps this didn't come across well over a text medium, but I'd appreciate it if you didn't chastise me based on your own assumptions about the meaning I intended.
Show threadcharly ⚧️Jan 7

@jsbarretto

but anthropomorphising machines is such an autistic thing to do, though

@evacide

Show threadTed MielczarekJan 6
@evacide I have framed this as "humans have failed the Turing test".
Show threadGabsJan 6
@evacide he just thought the machines would pass before the humans fail the test - turns out that was the other way around.
Show threadChuck MatternJan 6

@evacide

Or...perhaps there's just been a significant drop in the ability of humans to think critically since Turing's time?

Show threadDavid W. JonesJan 6
@evacide Well, considering Alan Turing's level of intelligence, probably the vast majority of us are stupider than he was! 😉
Show threadFully Automated! Solarpunk RPGJan 6
@evacide be nice: some of my best friends are human.
Show threadAlopeceJan 6
@FullyAutomatedRPG @evacide
You sure?
Show threadGemma SarraceniaJan 6
@evacide My poor ex boyfriend used to show me conversations with girls he was having on Instagram. I think he was trying to make me jealous. Every time I just sighed and said, "Honey, that's a bot."
Show threadByrnensorg🇮🇪🇺🇦🇵🇸🇬🇱🇩🇰Jan 6
@evacide It's a time when ignorance is openly celebrated, and the more I listen the more celebrations I hear.
Show threadFlipper 🐬🏳️‍🌈Jan 6
@evacide given what we did to Alan Turing, I suspect that he knew how stupid we are.
Show threadCassandrichJan 6

@evacide A related problem is that it doesn't measure intelligence at all, but measures the capability to weave a consistent made-up narrative for a self that doesn't actually exist.

Decades ago, most humans would have been operating on par with chatbots if they couldn't use knowledge of their own lives but instead had to improvise a false persona.

Sadly, making up plausible sounding bullshit is what LLMs are good at.

Show threadBakunin BoysJan 7

@dalias @evacide Yeah strategically LLMs are the same as DOCTOR or similar NLP chatbots of the 60s, but somehow, add more data and everyone is impressed.

I do think Turing didn't actually anticipate the test still being used, feels like it was something contrarian to say rather than an actual proposal for a test.

Show threadCharles U. FarleyJan 7
@bakuninboys @dalias @evacide I think Turing meant the test as a thought experiment, not a practical test. It's not "if you can convince humans for x amount of text y% of the time." It has to be all humans on any amount of text; no other threshold makes sense.
Show threadPolinaJan 6
@evacide Isn't that a bit to dismissive?
Show threadCondor Puma SerpienteJan 7
@evacide I choose to view it as "As soon as normies can't tell the difference, it's not going to matter"
Show threadHugs4friends ♾🇺🇦 🇵🇸😷Jan 7
@brad That time is now. @evacide
Show threadJordan BiserkovJan 7
@Tooden @brad @evacide
That time was 1966.
"What I had not realized is that extremely short exposures to a relatively simple computer program could induce powerful delusional thinking in quite normal people."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect
ELIZA effect - Wikipedia

Show threadJordan BiserkovJan 7

@evacide
Not Turing, but relevant:

"What I had not realized is that extremely short exposures to a relatively simple computer program could induce powerful delusional thinking in quite normal people."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect

ELIZA effect - Wikipedia

Show threadTrebethericJan 7
@evacide I don't think so. I mean, Turning didn't really have much to do with the so-called Turing Test and, if one reads the actual paper that sparked the whole thing, it's arguably more of a criticism of human inability to overcome petty things such as gender as an invitation to think about machine intelligence. It certainly wasn't any kind of proposal of an actual test or experiment, in my opinion. I mean, I think it make clear he was extremely aware of the full spectrum and distribution of human stupidity.
Show threadThorne LawlerJan 7
@evacide I think humans demonstrated that fact to Turing, in the end.😞
Show threadNéstor 🇵🇸Jan 7
@evacide
Show threadStargeezer SmithJan 7

@evacide
As I have long suspected, we can only be so intelligent, else we'd have solved all of our problems by now.

But stupidity seems to have no limit.

Show threadWillowJan 8
@evacide
Tbh, the Turing Test paper is itself shockingly stupid imo. I had grown up with the pop culture version of it, but when I finally sat down to read it, I found the argument incredibly over-simplifying and unconvincing.