I think you have to use a reasonably smart human as a baseline, otherwise literally any computer is AGI. Babbage’s Analytical Engine from 1830 was more intelligent than a human in a coma.
I don’t think so. I doubt GPT-4 will be able to convince someone who is trying to determine whether or not the if the think they are talking to is a human.
There’s literally been a website you could go on that opens a chat with either a human or GPT, but you do not know which one, and then you get like 30s to figure it out by chatting with them. Then you need to guess if it was a human or an AI you just talked to. And people get it wrong all the time.
i kinda agree. the turing should take accuracy and wisdom into account. gpt4 is, much like how gpt3.5 was, very confidently wrong some times. the code or advice it could be giving you could be technically true, but very very stupid to do in practice.
See the trouble with the Turing test is that the linguistic capabilities of the most sophisticated models well exceed those of the dumbest humans.
I think you have to use a reasonably smart human as a baseline, otherwise literally any computer is AGI. Babbage’s Analytical Engine from 1830 was more intelligent than a human in a coma.
Ironically for robots and the like to truly be accepted, they will have to be coded to make mistakes to seem more human.
I think we can just call the Turing test passed in this case.
I don’t think so. I doubt GPT-4 will be able to convince someone who is trying to determine whether or not the if the think they are talking to is a human.
There’s literally been a website you could go on that opens a chat with either a human or GPT, but you do not know which one, and then you get like 30s to figure it out by chatting with them. Then you need to guess if it was a human or an AI you just talked to. And people get it wrong all the time.
Edit: link to the research that came from that https://www.ai21.com/blog/human-or-not-results
The Turing test was passed in the 60s by rules based systems. It’s not a great test.
Is ChatGPT Passing the Turing Test Really Important? https://youtu.be/wdCzGwQv4rI
i kinda agree. the turing should take accuracy and wisdom into account. gpt4 is, much like how gpt3.5 was, very confidently wrong some times. the code or advice it could be giving you could be technically true, but very very stupid to do in practice.
“Very confidently wrong sometimes” is how I would describe most of humanity.