Graduate studies at Western
Minds and Machines 11 (4):567-576 (2001)
|Abstract||Since the introduction of the imitation game by Turing in 1950 there has been much debate as to its validity in ascertaining machine intelligence. We wish herein to consider a different issue altogether: granted that a computing machine passes the Turing Test, thereby earning the label of ``Turing Chatterbox'', would it then be of any use (to us humans)? From the examination of scenarios, we conclude that when machines begin to participate in social transactions, unresolved issues of trust and responsibility may well overshadow any raw reasoning ability they possess|
|Keywords||Intelligence Machine Science Speech Talking Turing, A|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Similar books and articles
Justin Leiber (2006). Turing's Golden: How Well Turing's Work Stands Today. Philosophical Psychology 19 (1):13-46.
Peter Kugel (2002). Computing Machines Can't Be Intelligent (...And Turing Said So). Minds and Machines 12 (4):563-579.
Susan G. Sterrett (2000). Turing's Two Tests for Intelligence. Minds and Machines 10 (4):541-559.
Robert M. French (1990). Subcognition and the Limits of the Turing Test. Mind 99 (393):53-66.
Saul Traiger (2000). Making the Right Identification in the Turing Test. Minds and Machines 10 (4):561-572.
Y. Sato & T. Ikegami (2004). Undecidability in the Imitation Game. Minds and Machines 14 (2):133-43.
Huma Shah & Kevin Warwick (2010). From the Buzzing in Turing’s Head to Machine Intelligence Contests. In TCIT 2010 / AISB 2010 Convention.
Justin Leiber (1995). On Turing's Turing Test and Why the Matter Matters. Synthese 104 (1):59-69.
Tyler Cowen & Michelle Dawson, What Does the Turing Test Really Mean? And How Many Human Beings (Including Turing) Could Pass?
Dale Jacquette (1993). Who's Afraid of the Turing Test? Behavior and Philosophy 20 (21):63-74.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads23 ( #60,497 of 757,546 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #27,325 of 757,546 )
How can I increase my downloads?