'means very little'

unless...you want to actually build the thing

that's the problem with "teh singularity" types...NONE OF THEM ARE CODERS...

all machine behavior is determined by human coders...absolutely nothing you can say changes this fact

YOUR ARGUMENT IS IRRATIONAL

"a computer that can program itself"

is a computer that has been programmed by a human with parameters and a system specifically made by humans for it to take defined variables and combine them in pre-programmed parameters

all pounded out by a dumb monkey

'teh singularity' is a tautology

you can't make a new thing by calling the same thing a different name

all of which are, as TFA says, not 'intelligence' at all!

we haven't managed to make machines until now that are smart at all. Artificial intelligence isn't synthetic intelligence: It's pseudo-intelligence. This really ought to be obvious. Clocks may keep time, but they don't know what time it is.

so glad to see published articles where they say this plainly

'teh singluarity' needs to go to the dustbin of history b/c it's wasting *billions* of research dollars

almost 10 years isn't a 'noob' on any internet forum

thank goodness the core /. membership hasn't abandoned the site.

says the user with a 7-digit UID

you have no idea what the "core /. membership" is like because you have just started commenting

the problem is the decision makers - not the ideas

being in charge means *deciding between options*

we have to blame the business people here

the problem is that the people with money don't know the difference between a *good* tech innovation and *bullshit* marketing gussied up as tech innovation

the problem is ignorance of the decision makers, not our ideas

there are plenty of good ideas to be had floating in the ether...

these extreme trolls are complex enough that they might mean something

i wonder what organization (and their PR wing) would be pissed that Slashdot published this story

it could be that if they can't keep it from being published then they systematically subvert it by putting racist/homophobic stuff as first post to make it obnoixious

in other words, sockpuppet griefers

There are many criticisms of the Turing test...from many angles.

You address none of them, you just simply stated the negative.

That's the problem...supporting the Turing paradigm means constantly avoiding the question (litterally and figuratively if you think about it)

How about listing those rules. I don't ever recall seeing the handbook.

exactly the point/problem with the Turing and 'teh singularity' paradigms

Oh baloney.

that's the correct analysis here

I'd rather we figure out how to build machines that can do things we want to do but can't, or aren't very good at.

well said...this should be the paradigm in computing design

exactly...it's all based on a tautology...a faulty ontology. The Computability Function is not a computing paradigm, it's reductive.

'AI' is complex machines following instructions. That's what it is. The rest is people projecting their own emotions onto inanimate objects.

When I say "it's a tautology" what I mean is, it's based on linguistic distinctions only. Not actual, functional distinctions.

A tautology says, "If people think a pile of shit is a steak dinner, then it becomes a steak dinner"

That's an extremem example, but it's actually not that far off from what 'teh singularity' crowd are doing with 'ai'

I'm a telecommunications engineer and cyberneticist...my MS is in Information & Comm Science and I'm ABD in System Science

I'm working on promoting the *Cybernetic* ontology as the foundational paradigm for computing.

Cybernetics for computing would be a combination of Claude Shannon, Norbert Weiner, Lovelace, and others...

In the cybernetic paradigm, the Atanasoff-Berry Computer is the prototypical advancement.

ahem...i'm tweeting about this using the #cybernetics hashtag...it's my way of trying to promote the idea

The Turing and Computability Function paradigm for computing is (finally) being rightly and fully criticized (ironically, as we get a Turing hollywood movie)

Ada Lovelace's theories ***do indeed*** provide the theoretical ground work (along with others like Claude Shannon) to cleans ourselves of Turing Test nonsense

However...this test...in TFA is not the test.

It's just a variation on the Turing test that still has the same tautology...it's a test of fooling a human in an artificial, one time only environment...which has nothing to do with actual computing

We need to stop pretending we can make a machine that thinks like we do...

It's a tautology and a waste of resources.

Machines follow the instructions we give them via code. End.

Greenwald is a thinly veiled attempt to convince an entire generation not to vote

true