dada » Wed Jun 10, 2020 1:12 am wrote:DrEvil » Wed Apr 01, 2020 5:16 pm wrote:This is totally not an AI trained to respond to people but a real human being typing these words. Trust me.
Trying to decide how much it really matters anymore. How many humans do you know that would pass a Turing test?
Depressingly few. When I sometimes muse about the possibility of a good chunk of people being philosophical zombies I'm only halfway joking, because god damn, it really feels like it at times.
When the computer learns how to fool the human seventy percent of the time, what will that say about the human control group in the test? I wonder if anyone ever asks themselves that.
Of course not. We're special. We can't say why or how, we just know that we have something that a machine can never have, usually couched in language and frameworks that excludes it from rigorous inquiry as a safeguard against learning a potentially depressing truth.
But at the moment, I'd say it's the opposite. Humans can fool me into thinking they're computers, seventy percent of the time!
Thinking about the word 'sophisticated.' A word with many meanings. Implications vary with context, inflection. Will a sophisticated computer learn to master the use of a word like sophisticated?
Or is a utilitarian competency enough. Brings us back to the same old, tired chestnut. Can a computer be a poet. Can a computer be intentionally funny. Can a computer watch Data get an emotion chip while on a Netflix binge.
Why would a computer want to be a poet, though. Why would anyone? I ask with all sincerity.
Hell if I know.
So, maybe utilitarian competency will do.
On another thread recently, Jack said about a politician that they sound like a sophist. And everyone knows what he means. But what if we talk about sophianity. How many people have even the slightest idea how to process the term?
Is it like sophistication? Sophistry? How is one supposed to react to the word? Sophianity as a mode of being. Not acquired taste, or a rhetorical tool, but a measure of the soul. One might ask how much sophianity is one invested with.
Sophianity is like fatimiya. But who here knows what that means? A thinking computer might, if it thought about the soul. A thinking computer might even have an easier time contemplating the soul than most humans. That would be funny, wouldn't it. The scientists would think that something must have gone terribly wrong.
The bar for the thinking computer is set lower with each passing day.
How do you know computers aren't thinking already? If, for the sake of argument and without getting into the nitty-gritty of it, you assume that our subjective experience of reality is an emergent property of the processes happening in our brains, then how can you know it's a phenomenon exclusive to meat?