I've played Eliza my self.
It doesn't take long to realize it
isn't intelligent.
I'm dyslexic so, as you guessed ( with your intelligence )
that I'd incorrectly stated what I'd obviously meant.
A rule based machine would just be confused. It would
either have to ignore it or ask me to correct my error.
A machine with enough ability to do better also wouldn't
make such errors as I have. It could be made to hide
for a while but like the Eliza game, it would eventually
give it self away.
Like I said, if I knew what it takes to truly be intelligent
to the point that I could write the algorithm in a computers
language I'd be doing something completely different.
All that I've seen so far is reflecting a part of humans
thinking into a computer algorithm. Only a small part.
The fact that the computer can do it so much faster than
I, hardly makes it intelligent.
I to would, someday, like to meet such an intelligence as you've
mentioned. So far, it is so far from where we are now that
I don't see that gap closing anytime soon. Clearly not with
the path we have taken so far.
Dwight
----------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Lisp does NOT use RPN - Re: cctalk
Digest, Vol 125, Issue 13
From: nf6x at
nf6x.net
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 22:30:34 -0800
To: cctalk at
classiccmp.org
On Jan 8, 2014, at 19:52 , dwight <dkelvey at hotmail.com> wrote:
Rule based systems can play a good game of Chess
but lack the ability to analyze and adapt to completely
different conditions, like go from a Chess game
to crossing a street safely.
"A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing."
-- Emo Philips
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/