Cybersex bot chat speed dating scene in charlotte nc
the ai programs are an empty shell, they match one input for a likely output, but do not grasp or have an innate concept of whatever we are talking about.eventually they will build a program that can pass the turing test and will fool everyone into thinking it is a person.wallace has done.still doesn't impress me very much.chatter about nothing and the alicebot can go on all day long.no silver medals have ever been awarded, and whenever a gold medal is finally awarded the contest will end.the contest consists of judges conducting typed “conversations” with the contestant programs and two humans (there used to be four) to try to figure out who the humans are, then giving scores from 1 to 25. thrashed her (she is a “female entity”–her words) 7 competitors (authored by computer professionals, students, self-taught programmers, chemical engineers, etc.) this year, and one judge even said she was “the second-most human talker in the event,” putting her above one of the actual humans. wallace has an excellent website all about a.l.i.c.e.richard wallace of san francisco has been working on since 1995; a.l.i.c.e. the loebner prize contest is run by the cambridge center for behavioral studies, the recipient of loebner's prize-money donation.
the bbc article makes this contest out to be some sort of amazing thing, and i was glad to stumble across the zdnet article, which puts a much more realistic spin on it. and was actually very impressed with the speed and “humanity” of the responses (e.g., when i asked what the square root of 91 is she said, “do i look like a calculator?of course if these things get better i can see a few crafty web people dropping these things in a real chatroom to “keep the room warm,” and some people probably wouldn't notice the difference.– by ziwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwiwii've tried a.l.i.c.e. in the past as well as many other “ai” programs dating back 15 or 20 years. does seem to be more advanced that the older programs but…none of the bots demonstrate any “intelligence” of their own although, they do show that their programmers are highly intelligent.until the software is able to truely learn and adapt itself based on what it has learned, it is farcical to call them artificial intelligence.