[ExI] spike turing test, was RE: ai class at stanford

[spike]

>... On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson
Subject: Re: [ExI] spike turing test, was RE: ai class at stanford

>...So here's a question.... which would be easier to program? The generic
Turing test "I'm pretending to be SOME generic human, and you can't tell the
difference" or the person specific test "I'm Paris Hilton, and you can't
tell that I'm not"... -Kelly


To further cloud an already broad and difficult question, there is a WW2
fighter game I only played a couple times, with another guy who is an
excellent fighter pilot gamer.  The mission is to guard a formation of B52s
with a squadron of fighter planes, when suddenly you are jumped by a
squadron of Nazi 109s.  A wild air battle ensues, but the part I find
interesting is that you can play single human or multiple humans, as
participants along with software allies.  You can review the battle
afterwards and watch from any plane's point of view, including enemy planes.
It is impossible to tell the difference between the human pilots and those
commanded by the computer.  You can't tell from their battle strategy or
their tactics or their flying skill.

I suppose the computer guided planes use lookup tables derived from how
humans have played during the development phase, but the point is that with
a sufficiently large lookup table, a computer is indistinguishable from a
human in certain settings.  Perhaps much of the time we function as enormous
lookup tables.  On typical internet chat groups, perhaps the carbon based
lookup tables aren't even very sophisticated.  That game setting is a form
of the Turing test perhaps, and the computer passes.

spike