DataRope on GitHub

annotate Evrything

A demo installation of a Javascript-based annotation library.

Annotation Project and Project page currently being updated.


" A conversation layer over the entire web that works everywhere, without needing implementation by any underlying site. "

Some points for annotation

The Turing test, developed by Alan Turing in 1950, is a test of a machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behaviour equivalent to, or indistinguishable from, that of a human. Turing proposed that a human evaluator would judge natural language conversations between a human and a machine designed to generate human-like responses. The evaluator would be aware that one of the two partners in conversation is a machine, and all participants would be separated from one another. The conversation would be limited to a text-only channel such as a computer keyboard and screen so the result would not depend on the machine's ability to render words as speech.[2] If the evaluator cannot reliably tell the machine from the human, the machine is said to have passed the test. The test results do not depend on the machine's ability to give correct answers to questions, only how closely its answers resemble those a human would give.

The test was introduced by Turing in his 1950 paper, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence", while working at the University of Manchester (Turing, 1950; p. 460).[3] It opens with the words: "I propose to consider the question, 'Can machines think?'" Because "thinking" is difficult to define, Turing chooses to "replace the question by another, which is closely related to it and is expressed in relatively unambiguous words."[4] Turing describes the new form of the problem in terms of a three-person game called the "imitation game", in which an interrogator asks questions of a man and a woman in another room in order to determine the correct sex of the two players. Turing's new question is: "Are there imaginable digital computers which would do well in the imitation game?"[5] This question, Turing believed, is one that can actually be answered. In the remainder of the paper, he argued against all the major objections to the proposition that "machines can think".[6]

Since Turing first introduced his test, it has proven to be both highly influential and widely criticised, and it has become an important concept in the philosophy of artificial intelligence.[7][8] Some of these criticisms, such as John Searle's Chinese room, are controversial in their own right. 

"If they find a parrot who could answer to everything, I would claim it to be an intelligent being without hesitation."

Mainstream AI researchers argue that trying to pass the Turing test is merely a distraction from more fruitful research.[43] Indeed, the Turing test is not an active focus of much academic or commercial effort—as Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig write: "AI researchers have devoted little attention to passing the Turing test."[74] There are several reasons.

First, there are easier ways to test their programs. Most current research in AI-related fields is aimed at modest and specific goals, such as automated scheduling, object recognition, or logistics. To test the intelligence of the programs that solve these problems, AI researchers simply give them the task directly. Russell and Norvig suggest an analogy with the history of flight: Planes are tested by how well they fly, not by comparing them to birds. "Aeronautical engineering texts," they write, "do not define the goal of their field as 'making machines that fly so exactly like pigeons that they can fool other pigeons.'"[74]

Second, creating lifelike simulations of human beings is a difficult problem on its own that does not need to be solved to achieve the basic goals of AI research. Believable human characters may be interesting in a work of art, a game, or a sophisticated user interface, but they are not part of the science of creating intelligent machines, that is, machines that solve problems using intelligence.

Turing wanted to provide a clear and understandable example to aid in the discussion of the philosophy of artificial intelligence.[75] John McCarthy observes that the philosophy of AI is "unlikely to have any more effect on the practice of AI research than philosophy of science generally has on the practice of science."[76] 

Source: Wikipedia.org, URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test

"If they find a parrot who could answer to everything, I would claim it to be an intelligent being without hesitation."

French philosopher and lexicographer Denis Diderot (1713-1784), on the nature of intelligence in animals.

2019 Web Annotation Project Page - currently being updated