[Humanist] 32.22 Google Duplex and the Turing Test

Humanist Discussion Group willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Tue May 15 08:31:54 CEST 2018


                  Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 32, No. 22.
            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
                       www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org

  [1]   From:    "Dave Postles" <davep at davelinux.info>                     (33)
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 32.17 Google Duplex and the Turing Test?

  [2]   From:    Tim Smithers <tim.smithers at cantab.net>                    (21)
        Subject: Re:  32.17 Google Duplex and the Turing Test?

  [3]   From:    Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>          (26)
        Subject: Turing's play


--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 10:55:47 +0100
        From: "Dave Postles" <davep at davelinux.info>
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 32.17 Google Duplex and the Turing Test?
        In-Reply-To: <20180514084600.432EB147D at s16382816.onlinehome-server.info>


Perhaps Google will relinquish the double Irish before its terminal date
(2020) now then? Probably not. Oh well, we'll have to manage without the
nurses which aggressive tax avoidance would support (Apple, Google, Caffe
Nero, Arcadia Group, Boots, Starbucks and y'all).

On Mon, May 14, 2018 9:46 am, Humanist Discussion Group wrote:
> Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 32, No. 17.
> Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
> www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist Submit to:
> humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org
>
>
>
> Date: Sun, 13 May 2018 10:45:53 +0000
> From: Andrew Prescott <Andrew.Prescott at glasgow.ac.uk>
> Subject: Google duplex
>
>
> Would we say the Turing test has been passed? The second conversation is
> particularly remarkable.
>
> https://www.inverse.com/article/44796-everything-we-know-about-google-dup
> lex
>
> A
>
>
> [University of Glasgow: The Times Scottish University of the Year 2018]

-- 
http://www.historicalresources.myzen.co.uk (research and pedagogy)
I use Lilo web search: no tracking and social good (Firefox add-on)
This machine runs on liquid Linux
Often coming to you via TOR (The Onion Router)
De Havilland Fellow, University of Hertfordshire



--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:57:44 +0200
        From: Tim Smithers <tim.smithers at cantab.net>
        Subject: Re:  32.17 Google Duplex and the Turing Test?
        In-Reply-To: <20180514084600.432EB147D at s16382816.onlinehome-server.info>


I wouldn't.  To me, Duplex gets nowhere near it. -- Tim


--[3]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 07:05:47 +0100
        From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>
        Subject: Turing's play
        In-Reply-To: <20180514084600.432EB147D at s16382816.onlinehome-server.info>


About the Turing Test and passing it. Blay Whitby, in "The Turing Test:
Al's Biggest Blind Alley?", in Machines and Thought, vol. 1, ed.
Millican and Clark, points out that Turing was always careful to talk
about his "imitation game", never a "test". A game is an activity to be
played; a test is something you pass or fail. Big difference. Turing's
friend Robin Gandy relates the mischievousness and provocative intent
with which Turing devised the game, in "Human versus mechanical
intelligence" (same volume). 

It seems to me that here we have invented a goalpost and as in other
instances we are moving it to suit the unannounced but rather obvious agenda
of the publicists and digital empire builders. The fellow from Google is
quite clear as to the goal: it isn't to construct a system that will be
intelligent in any sense we might celebrate, rather to imitate a servant
whose intelligence has been suppressed by his or her position. Here 
the old vision -- at least as old as the 1960s -- of robotic servants has 
yet again been dressed up in near-futuristic clothing. See, for example, A. Webster, ‘‘Computers: The New Age of Miracles. Hundreds of Brains 
in a Thimble’’, in The Globe and Mail (Toronto, Canada), November 16 
1965, which I quote in the context of Semantic Web boasting, in 
"The future of digital humanities is a matter of words", A Companion 
to New Media Dynamics, ed. Hartley, Burgess and Bruns (2013).

Contrast what Demis Hassabis, David Silver and others are doing with 
AlphaGo: edging their way to a different 'intelligence', one that
'thinks' unlike us, in its native combinatorial mode. See Silver et al,
"Mastering the game of Go without human knowledge", Nature 550 (19
October 2017).

Yours,
WM
--
Willard McCarty (www.mccarty.org.uk/), Professor emeritus, Department of
Digital Humanities, King's College London; Adjunct Professor, Western
Sydney University; Editor, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews
(www.tandfonline.com/loi/yisr20)





More information about the Humanist mailing list