At the other end of the line is a real person who answers phone calls and chats with your customers. Google is the best and most accurate smartphone assistant, according to new research. Siri understood Begin typing your search term above and press enter to search. Press ESC to cancel.
Skip to content Home Philosophy Is cleverbot fake? Ben Davis February 5, Is cleverbot fake? Then there is a boatload of other issue. How do you quantify the humanness of a subject? Are we looking at socialization or linguistic skills i. What few people seem to know is that the original test proposed in Turing's seminal paper, has a sort of gender-bender element to it.
I did that as well, though in order to help it retain austerity in the conversation, I did a couple of things. First, I did a database pre-seed from existing chat conversations from IRC, mimicking in grammar choice a handful of chatters I was familiar with to give it its personality. Topically, it wasn't allowed to 'learn' - eg. Part of what i did this was to have the bot ignore assignments in person's conversations as a preliminary filter. Not that Turing tests are a mature industry, we need to start treating this with the full panoply of dismal respect.
What's left of the man's legacy? On the Turing test, the computers mostly just sat there while humans limbo danced the bar down to ankle height. All he's got left is the really long paper tape immune to the knottings of entropy--so long as it's massless and frictionless and you only make one--and that's really hard to manufacture and ship, even supposing your customer already has the Heisenberg sprocket feeder.
We could send the USS Capstan to a planetary system near you, but the tape would be a party line, and most of his theorems would fail.
Which brings up the touchy issue of one tape per universe, or else. What if another galaxy out there fabricates a forbidden second tape without obeying the rules of the infinite-tape galactic token ring? What kind of short-snouted creature arrives to adjudicate that? For example, what if a Microsoft comes along and decides, horror of horrors, on a different Sierpinski subspace embedding not yet registered at the Trans Galactic patent office for their illicit competitive tape?
Two doubly-infinite tapes on different Sierpinski subspace embeddings would not get along. I suspect we would soon find ourselves on the top of a single-ended list for the next hyperspace bypass, just as soon as the stubby Vogon fingers fix the mess caused by rewinding right through the massless feedstop.
The fact that humans were voted as human only If a participant erroneously believes that computers are already at the level where they can have a sensible impromptu conversation with humans, they're often going to wonder if the human on the other side of the conversation is a bot. As for the So without being told that fact, many of the voters would think the other party was trying to be indistinguishable, rather than trying to appear human.
Cleverbot: My chances to know her.. To spend time with her. To love her.. That's what with her means. Maybe I've got a tendency towards odd conversation or something, but Cleverbot has never seemed very clever to me.
As in, it may ask you a question, but it doesn't care about your response. You may ask a question, get an answer, ask a followup question, and it's as if it is a completely new subject. All to frequently. In fact, it tends to get repetitious with a few concepts.
I would expect something like this to be able to 'learn' from what it is fed and synthesize coherent sentences. Dump a paragraph into it and it will ignore everything else. It's about as sentient as the Infocom Text Adventures of the s. And that's really pushing it.
Internet chat has really lowered the bar. A cat walking across a keyboard could probably pass nowadays I'm not surprised.
Tomorrows World did a program in the late '90s with three humans and some bots. You could connect to their server and either talk to one of the humans or a bot but not know which or read the transcripts and vote on them. Lots of the transcripts were people going through incredibly formulaic conversations of the kind that you get in learn-to-speak-English books, so it was difficult to tell if they were human or not.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead. Try the CryptoTab Browser. It works like a regular web browser but mines Bitcoin for you while you browse!
Works on all devices. Do you develop on GitHub? You can keep using GitHub but automatically sync your GitHub releases to SourceForge quickly and easily with this tool and take advantage of SourceForge's massive reach. Follow Slashdot on LinkedIn. This past Sunday, the votes from a Turing test held at the Techniche festival in Guwahati, India were released.
They revealed that Cleverbot was voted to be human Real humans did only slightly better and were assumed to be humans Perhaps Cleverbot would consent to taking part in a Slashdot interview, to be extra-convincing. This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted. Has Cleverbot Passed the Turing Test?
More Login. Archived Discussion Load All Comments. Full Abbreviated Hidden. Definitely not Score: 4 , Insightful. Clever bot is a piece of garbage that hasn't even surpassed Perl scripts on IRC in the s.
It isn't even worth mentioning, it's nothing more than a piece of crap with a "Web 2. Far from AI, far behind what's already been out there. Share twitter facebook. Re:Definitely not Score: 5 , Funny.
Parent Share twitter facebook. Re: Score: 3 , Funny. Re: Score: 3. Re: Score: 2. Ok, I hate to feed the trolls, but Can we assume that any entity spouting racist claptrap is, in fact, a poorly socialized and not very intelligent human? Re:Racist Score: 3. No you cannot assume that. Once the New Hotness becomes Chatterbots, we'll see some scary good ones within four years. Re:Definitely not Score: 5 , Insightful. Re: Score: 2 , Troll.
Re:Definitely not Score: 5 , Informative. I don't read those as "Chatterbot passes turing test. Re:Definitely not Score: 4 , Insightful. Re: Score: 2 , Interesting. Spork writes:. If you read Turing's original article, you'd see that he imagined the test very differently from this. He didn't come from the ADD era of instant messaging. He was picturing a conversation about the symbolic value of a certain element in a piece of literature.
The test isn't any worse now, it's just that people chat like bots. I don't understand why they don't ask about the last book the other has read, and ask them to describe it, and follow up with an open-ended question about a specific point in the desc. Re: Score: 3 , Insightful. This says it all Score: 5 , Informative. Conversation I just had The exchanges I just had with Cleverbot suggested that he was off his meds. Re:This says it all Score: 5 , Funny.
You can definitively make out a chatbot with this simple conversational thread: - I'm going to tell you a color. Since cleverbot just parrots back responses from its DB, the responses make no sense: Me: I'm going to tell you a color. Hold on Score: 5 , Funny. Hold on I've not been able to go talk to Cleverbot for more than two exchanges before it goes off topic with some completely rando The follow-up question Score: 2.
How many slashdot users can pass the same Turing Test? Re:The follow-up question Score: 5 , Funny. What do you think I feel about how many slashdot users can pass the same Turing test? Earlier you mentioned slashdot users. We have Humans on Slashdot??? Xtranormal version Score: 2. Scripted, of course Turing test was passed long ago. Re:Turing test was passed long ago.
Score: 4 , Funny. I mean, being a robot's great but we don't have emotions and sometimes that makes me very sad. It is relentless: it will stop at nothing until it empathises with us. I suspect it would say "I like turtles! Ah, I get it. But, because you were talking about a turtle, it assumed you were talking about the nature of the universe.
Now, naturally, a turtle cannot be on its back because the only thing that can be on a turtle's back is the world or another turtle. If you come to Cleverbot with nonsense like turtles being. Score: 5 , Insightful. So, I went and had a little chat with 'clever' bot to see how clever it was.
I thought I'd start off with something a typical five-year-old could answer: User: Hello. Score: 4 , Insightful. Score: 4 , Interesting. Here, try this exceedingly generic 'emotional' conversation out that I just had with this thing: Me: How you doing?
Score: 5 , Interesting. I've tried to repeat the same question of yours: If I have 5 ostriches, and two run away, how many are left?
I tried it as well but stayed consisted with the numbering. If I have 5 ostriches, and 2 run away, how many are left? I am not answering that question what is this, some kind of quiz? I think it finally wised up Here's mine: Hello. I decided to mess with its mind. It's not really that surprising, usually what happens in these types of contests is the 'human' responders tend to act like computers. It is hard for a computer to act like a human, but it is not so hard for a human to act like a computer.
All in all, it's an idiot savant of a bot. It's no worse than your average trolling tard. One thing we do have to keep in mind, the web cleverbot is not the same cleverbot that was tested, The web version of it checks 3 different ways to find an appropriate response, the competing cleverbot searches Not to say it is even a good AI, but it is fully possible that the competing cleverbot is far more believable then the web one.
You can rent a version that uses a much more CPU power for it's answers. I smell a money making scam. Why even put the non-performing one online if it performs so badly. It just makes the whole project look like a joke. If they were really serious, they would only put the real bot online, but limit the amount of users who could access it, so as not to overload their servers. The one they put online just makes them look like idiots.
Re: Score: 2 , Informative. Nothing unusual about the grammar. Best wishes from Great Britain. Short answer: No Score: 2 , Funny.
Long answer: User: Okay bot, here's how this works. Cleverbot: How long will that take? User: Two seconds. What is the third word in your reply? Cleverbot: There is no Fight Club. Changing the bar Score: 3. Is not that machines are smarter, just that humans became dumber. I hope not Score: 2. Re:I hope not Score: 4 , Funny. Turing test sucks Score: 2. All hope for humanity is lost. Score: 2. If those percentages are correct, I don't want to live on this planet anymore.
As an aside, it is fun to use cleverbot to chat with people in Omegle, or to use cleverbot and pitting it against the jabberwacky chat bot. You get some pretty hilarious conversations that way. View All Images. Show Comments. The sale is not as much of the whimsical move of a kooky billionaire as it first appears, however.
Know Your Meme is an advertising supported site and we noticed that you're using an ad-blocking solution. Read Edit History. About Cleverbot is a website that features an artificial intelligence AI application that chats with users in real-time. History In , British programmer Rollo Carpenter coded the first incarnation of a chatterbot program that was created to trick people into thinking they were talking with another human, thereby passing the "Turing Test".
Top entries this week. Traffic Cleverbot. Features h4. Conversation Examples Highlights Meme Responses An article on Singularity Hub [7] claimed that "talking to Cleverbot is a little like talking with the collective community of the internet", referencing how it learns phrases from other Internet users.
Turing Test On September 4th, , Cleverbot participated in a Turing test, an attempt to measure a computer program's ability to trick someone into thinking it is a human, at a technology event in India. The Cleverbot test took place at the Techniche festival in Guwahati, India.
Thirty volunteers conducted a typed 4-minute conversation with an unknown entity. Half of the volunteers spoke to humans while the rest chatted with Cleverbot. All the conversations were displayed on large screens for an audience to see. Both the participants and the audience then rated the humanness of all the responses, with Cleverbot voted A total of votes were cast — many more than in any previous Turing test, says Cleverbot's developer and AI specialist Rollo Carpenter.
External References [1] Cleverbot [2] Alexa — cleverbot. Latest Editorial And News. Meme Paperclip Maximizer. Culture Self-Driving Car. Site Artflow.
0コメント