• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    820 days ago

    That’s not what LLMs are for. That’s like hammering a screw and being irritated it didn’t twist in nicely.

    The turing test is designed to see if an AI can pass for human in a conversation.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13
      edit-2
      20 days ago

      turing test is designed to see if an AI can pass for human in a conversation.

      I’m pretty sure that I could ask a human that question in a normal conversation.

      The idea of the Turing test was to have a way of telling humans and computers apart. It is NOT meant for putting some kind of ‘certified’ badge on that computer, and …

      That’s not what LLMs are for.

      …and you can’t cry ‘foul’ if I decide to use a question for which your computer was not programmed :-)

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        20 days ago

        In a normal conversation sure.

        In this kind Turing tests you may be disqualified as a jury for asking that question.

        Good science demands controlled areas and defined goals. Everyone can organize a homebrew touring tests but there also real proper ones with fixed response times, lengths.

        Some touring tests may even have a human pick the best of 5 to provide to the jury. There are so many possible variations depending on test criteria.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          0
          edit-2
          20 days ago

          you may be disqualified as a jury for asking that question.

          You want to read again about the scientific basics of the Turing test (hint: it is not a tennis match)

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            020 days ago

            There is no competition in science (or at least there shouldn’t be). You are subjectively disqualified from judging llm’s if you draw your conclusions on an obvious trap which you yourself have stated is beyond the scope of what it was programmed to do.