🚀 go-pugleaf

gilbert@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Gilbert Cockton) babbles:

>Just what sort of Science did young Mr. Turing have in mind when he
>decided that subjective opinion could ever be a measure of system
>performance?

Gotta start somewhere. He wasn't measuring "system performance", he was
measuring the relationship between human expectations and the reality,
based upon an observed, but until then unspoken, set of rules already in
place in human interactions.

>How do AI types *REALLY* test their systems?

Well, since you know so much, why don't you tell us a good metric for
awareness, hot shit ?

Seems to me the only metric for awareness is a boolean test for awareness,
as measured by another point of awareness, with error checking carried
out by consensus reality. I know some people will object to this as a way
of generating quantifiable data, but I have never had any trouble integrating
a series of 'yes'-'no' answers into a more detailed observation, and in fact
it forms a major portion of my pool of problem-solving techniques in life.

I see nothing shameful in such an effort. It may not meet _your_ criteria,
but it meets everyone else's. Consensus reality is hard to argue with.

But if you _like_ beating your head against a wall, well ... I don't think
that's particularly suggestive of intelligence, however -- artificial or
otherwise.

There's nothing intelligent about unanswerable questions if they don't make
any contribution to the discussion at hand.


>Gilbert Cockton, Department of Computing Science,  The University, Glasgow
>	gilbert@uk.ac.glasgow.cs <europe>!ukc!glasgow!gilbert

-- richard


-- 
 *    "We must hang together, gentlemen ... else, we shall most assuredly     *
 *     hang separately."         Benjamin Franklin, 1776                      *
 *                                                                            *
 *      ..{amdahl|decwrl|octopus|pyramid|ucbvax}!avsd.UUCP!childers@tycho     *