Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
Search - "turing test"
-
Facebook: "Our facial recognition automatically tags people in pictures."
Tesla: "Our deep learning algorithm drives cars by itself."
Andrew Ng: "I predict patients' likelihood of dying with 99% accuracy."
Google: "You know one of our algorithms is going to pass the Turing test very soon."
Wall Street: "We use satellite images to predict stock prices based how filled car parks of specific stores are."
The remaining majority of data sciencists: "We overfit linear models."2 -
I told my colleague today that he didn't pass the Turing Test.
He did not understand.
Which proves my point. -
A is for Assembly, a wizard's spell
B is for Bootstrap, so bland and the same. And also for Brainf*ck, will blow you away
C is for COBOL, your grandad knows that
D is for daemon, your server knows what
E is for Express.js, you node what is coming
F is for FORTRAN, which is perferct for sciencing
G is for GNU which is GNU not UNIX
H is for Haskell using functional units
I is for Intance, An action of Object
J is for Java plays with them Always
K is for Kotlin, Android's new toy
L is for Lisp, scheming a ploy
M is for Matlab, who knows how it works
N is for Node a bloatware of code
O is for Objective Pascal, you did not expect that
P is for programming, we all love to do that
Q is for Queries, A database is made
R is for R, statistics are great
S is for Selenium, you have to test that
S is for Smalltalk, let's make it all brief
T is for Turing Test, how human is this?
U is for Unix, build with all talents
V is for Visual Studio, built with all laments
W is for Web, lets build something cool
X is for XHTML, remember all that?
Y is for Y2K, I'm tired as f*ck
Z is for Zip, let's zip is all now.
Get yourself coffee and back to the grind.8 -
reverse turing test in which you have to convince machine that you are a human... oh wait we already have captcha2
-
found this gem today.
P.S.
captcha - Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart.
ahh, seems promising!!3 -
We shouldn’t worry about AI passing the Turing test. We should worry about AI intentionally failing Turing test.2
-
CAPTCHA meaning: "Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart".
Proof the the CS community is bad at creating acronyms.4 -
I'm not scared of a computer passing the Turing Test. I'm terrified of one that intentionally fails it.
Source: https://reddit.com/r/...2 -
I’m not scared of a machine that passes the turing test, I’m scared of the one that intentionally fail it
-
Just applied to a job with Microsoft with no professional dev history at all... I consider it a Turing test..3
-
Jeff Dean Facts (Source: God)
Jeff Dean once failed a Turing test when he correctly identified the 203rd Fibonacci number in less than a second
Jeff Dean compiles and runs his code before submitting, but only to check for compiler and CPU bugs
Unsatisfied with constant time, Jeff Dean created the world's first O(1/n) algorithm
When Jeff Dean designs software, he first codes the binary and then writes the source as documentation
Compilers don't warn Jeff Dean. Jeff Dean warns compilers
Jeff Dean wrote an O(n^2) algorithm once. It was for the Traveling Salesman Problem
Jeff Dean's watch displays seconds since January 1st, 1970.
gcc -O4 sends your code to Jeff Dean for a complete rewrite -
Someone mentioned being frustrated with people who answer "either/or" questions with "yes". I figured out why. They are not human. They are a robot and their processing of language is failing.
A simple question:
Q: The car is red or the car is green?
A: Yes
Breakdown:
The car is red. Yes, True
The car is green. No, False
The car is red OR the car is green.
True OR False
True || False = True
True = Yes
So they dissected the language like a computer treating "or" as a logical OR. This proves they are a robot pretending to be human. They failed the Turing test.7 -
!rant
Just watching Google io and I swear the new Google Assistant just passed the Turing test?
The assistant called and made a haircut booking over the phone with a human and it seemed so human like!
Turing test is to determine between a machine and human right?4 -
I miss the old steam sales where you could bag some really good deals if you just payed some attention. Nowadays though they just develop some rinse and repeat novel game, event or something and the deals are predictable. Max 50% if the game still got some steam (like stardew Valley) and 66-90 if the game is fading into obscurity (Turing Test)
-
What does GPT-3 tell us about how our brains work?
I just read an interesting article (link below) about how it does on the turing test. I've had this inclination for a while that state of the art AI is "incomplete", in the sense that we have some of the systems to make AGI, but not all of them. One of the comments they make is that "GPT-3 often finds it easier to write code to solve a programming problem, than to solve the problem on one example input", and that's the nail on the head. We can codify situations, describe the rules, put them in memory and run those rules in our head. We can manipulate the input to see how it'll change, we can spot from a problem statement what the rules are instead of focusing on what the answer is. Anyway, light bulb moment shared.
Link: https://lacker.io/ai/2020/...9 -
A bot that passes the Turing test so easily that it makes you question about your own consciousness!2
-
So I found myself in a situation where I scored 50% on Turing test. How can I be sure that I am human?
For the reference:
https://newscientist.com/article/...16 -
Why is it that most people that reply to feedback/support forms of just about any web site in general are complete dimwits? If they are people, that is. In that case, congratulations! You've just passed the inverted Turing test!2
-
Turing Test Time
I'm alone and my friends have died. A year has passed and I think about them every day. There are few people I can interact with and one day I speak to someone who tells me things I have never heard that keep my attention.
How do I feel during and after our conversation ?
Additionally my child get second place at a tournament, how do I feel about it.
Will you ever feel the same ?3 -
The Turing Test, a concept introduced by Alan Turing in 1950, has been a foundation concept for evaluating a machine's ability to exhibit human-like intelligence. But as we edge closer to the singularity—the point where artificial intelligence surpasses human intelligence—a new, perhaps unsettling question comes to the fore: Are we humans ready for the Turing Test's inverse? Unlike Turing's original proposition where machines strive to become indistinguishable from humans, the Inverse Turing Test ponders whether the complex, multi-dimensional realities generated by AI can be rendered palatable or even comprehensible to human cognition. This discourse goes beyond mere philosophical debate; it directly impacts the future trajectory of human-machine symbiosis.
Artificial intelligence has been advancing at an exponential pace, far outstripping Moore's Law. From Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) that create life-like images to quantum computing that solve problems unfathomable to classical computers, the AI universe is a sprawling expanse of complexity. What's more compelling is that these machine-constructed worlds aren't confined to academic circles. They permeate every facet of our lives—be it medicine, finance, or even social dynamics. And so, an existential conundrum arises: Will there come a point where these AI-created outputs become so labyrinthine that they are beyond the cognitive reach of the average human?
The Human-AI Cognitive Disconnection
As we look closer into the interplay between humans and AI-created realities, the phenomenon of cognitive disconnection becomes increasingly salient, perhaps even a bit uncomfortable. This disconnection is not confined to esoteric, high-level computational processes; it's pervasive in our everyday life. Take, for instance, the experience of driving a car. Most people can operate a vehicle without understanding the intricacies of its internal combustion engine, transmission mechanics, or even its embedded software. Similarly, when boarding an airplane, passengers trust that they'll arrive at their destination safely, yet most have little to no understanding of aerodynamics, jet propulsion, or air traffic control systems. In both scenarios, individuals navigate a reality facilitated by complex systems they don't fully understand. Simply put, we just enjoy the ride.
However, this is emblematic of a larger issue—the uncritical trust we place in machines and algorithms, often without understanding the implications or mechanics. Imagine if, in the future, these systems become exponentially more complex, driven by AI algorithms that even experts struggle to comprehend. Where does that leave the average individual? In such a future, not only are we passengers in cars or planes, but we also become passengers in a reality steered by artificial intelligence—a reality we may neither fully grasp nor control. This raises serious questions about agency, autonomy, and oversight, especially as AI technologies continue to weave themselves into the fabric of our existence.
The Illusion of Reality
To adequately explore the intricate issue of human-AI cognitive disconnection, let's journey through the corridors of metaphysics and epistemology, where the concept of reality itself is under scrutiny. Humans have always been limited by their biological faculties—our senses can only perceive a sliver of the electromagnetic spectrum, our ears can hear only a fraction of the vibrations in the air, and our cognitive powers are constrained by the limitations of our neural architecture. In this context, what we term "reality" is in essence a constructed narrative, meticulously assembled by our senses and brain as a way to make sense of the world around us. Philosophers have argued that our perception of reality is akin to a "user interface," evolved to guide us through the complexities of the world, rather than to reveal its ultimate nature. But now, we find ourselves in a new (contrived) techno-reality.
Artificial intelligence brings forth the potential for a new layer of reality, one that is stitched together not by biological neurons but by algorithms and silicon chips. As AI starts to create complex simulations, predictive models, or even whole virtual worlds, one has to ask: Are these AI-constructed realities an extension of the "grand illusion" that we're already living in? Or do they represent a departure, an entirely new plane of existence that demands its own set of sensory and cognitive tools for comprehension? The metaphorical veil between humans and the universe has historically been made of biological fabric, so to speak.7