This also includes the coastline and international airports. So, maybe the interior of Alaska is free.

Yes you're right. I didn't read that properly.

Although I think the summary oversimplifies things a lot. Skimming the actual paper, it looks like the Lovelace test is not a test in itself but a means to critique tests for AI. It could apply to a chatbot or a story writer or anything else.

So if I ask a chatbot "How many legs does a horse have", it would fail if it just looks up the answer in a database that contains "legs", "horse" and knows to give the answer "4" (because can trivially explain that), but if it has learned from earlier conversation what a horse is and what a leg is and comes up with a correct answer, it would pass, because I have no way of knowing the exact inputs it used. Something like that anyway.

Nice strawman. So does the NIC have a legal mission to gather intelligence? Does forging certificates constitute legitimate intelligence collection?

Also, I remember when Deep Blue was playing Kasparov, the IBM programmers had no idea why it was playing the way it was. It was coming up with strategies that the programmers did not anticipate.

You could use the fact that you regularly share driving duties as an explanation of why you don't know who was driving. this has been accepted as a eason for dismissal in the past., although it might be helpful to be rich.

What else, within the purview of the EU, does need to be solved and isn't being actively addressed?

What's a "program" ("anything")?

A deterministic sequence of instructions that could be converted to work on a universal Turing machine. I don;t htink this is really a valid criticism.

What does it mean to be "engineered to produce" one?

Presumably we're talking about a specific condition and expectation that is part of the specification. Although since a lot of specs are informal this does need to be clarified.

What's a "hardware fluke"?

Not sure on this one. My initial thought was that this was just a requirement that it not produce pure randomness and get a valid result statistically.

What constitutes "explanation" of how it was done?

I think this one is the main problem. It's very subjective what an explanation is. It's also somewhat dependent on the programmer.

I think game playing is a better illustration of AI than chatbots. Good systems need to plan ahead and estimate probabilities on limited data, which have obvious parallels to human cognition.

But you don't have dandruff!

Exactly!

The point is that we need a new untested aircraft with its own unique maintenence issues.

And yet, I just read a study that most doctors and clinicians involved with breast cancer can not correctly identify the liklihood of having breast cancer if someone tests positive for it. Answers ranged from 10-90%. Correct answer is 10%. Being taught it in medical school is one thing, but applying it on the job is another apparently.

You mean you've never heard of the Millenium Falcon?

Maybe so it doesn't crash so much?

Who's talking about a PC here? I'm talking about consoles.

XBox Live is a single service that integrates the entire online functionality of an XBox. Online gaming, chat, high scores, and all the rest.

would it need to have shipped as part of what was then the monopoly PC operating system, or would third party matchmaking frameworks count as well?

I have no idea what it would need to do. Tell you what; solve that problem and then I'll agree you're innovative as well.

That word is subjective, and people will spend days arguing over subjective definitions. Could you give a more objective criterion?

No. Can you can give an objective criterion for "innovation"?

And you needed an Xbox Live subscription and a copy of each game for each console to play Xbox Live.

You needed a single XBox live subscription. it worked for all games for all publishers. Did anyone else offer this? Was it integrated with the rest of the system?