From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!olivea!uunet!ogicse!hsdndev!husc-news.harvard.edu!brauer!zeleny Wed Feb  5 11:56:04 EST 1992
Article 3382 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai.philosophy:3382 sci.philosophy.tech:2014
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!olivea!uunet!ogicse!hsdndev!husc-news.harvard.edu!brauer!zeleny
>From: zeleny@brauer.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: Humongous table-lookup misapprehensions
Keywords: table-lookup,AI
Message-ID: <1992Feb1.202710.8329@husc3.harvard.edu>
Date: 2 Feb 92 01:27:08 GMT
References: <1992Jan25.224700.8656@ida.liu.se> <1992Jan28.164711.8184@husc3.harvard.edu> <1992Jan29.023448.11610@aisb.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: Dept. of Math, Harvard Univ.
Lines: 58
Nntp-Posting-Host: brauer.harvard.edu

In article <1992Jan29.023448.11610@aisb.ed.ac.uk> 
jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton) writes:

>In article <1992Jan28.164711.8184@husc3.harvard.edu> 
>zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny) writes:

>>In article <1992Jan25.224700.8656@ida.liu.se> 
>>c89ponga@odalix.ida.liu.se (Pontus Gagge) writes:

PG:
>>>Pro primo: The table-lookup passes the Turing test by *definition*. There
>>>*is* no conversation which makes it fail the Turing test - to reveal that
>>>it is not a human. Whatever extra condition you pose (time, city, earlier
>>>conversations) may be met by simply augmenting the definition.

MZ:
>>Not true.  Temporal considerations undermine the very idea of a static
>>table, requiring constant update thereof through some input mechanism.
>>Once this is admitted, you are faced with the problem of representing
>>contextual information in a fashion that lends itself to an application of
>>the same lexicographic ordering device used in the construction of the
>>original table.  At this point, the issue of knowledge representation rears
>>its ugly head.  Sorry, but until you find a way to deal with all this, the
>>question of table-lookup Turing-cheater has to be answered in the negative.

JD:
>I still don't see what's wrong with a static table.  How is it
>different from someone who's been asleep (while the table was
>built, say) and is now sitting in a room empty except for a 
>teletype?  What constant update is required?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the challenge of the Turing test seems to be
to distinguish a computer from an ordinary human being, not Rip Van Winkle. 

MZ:
>>I am afraid you misunderstood me.  My point was that, due to the contextual
>>factors, the "conversation state" can't be determined on the basis of words
>>alone.  Once again, the semantic and pragmatic issues have to be addressed
>>before you can declare the syntactical aspect to be under control.

JD:
>Why do they have to be addressed after the creation of the table?

I am assuming that its creation takes time, during which our culture will
inevitably change in ways impossible to predict, and that these changes
will inevitably come to bear on the meaningfulness of its entries.

`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'
: Qu'est-ce qui est bien?  Qu'est-ce qui est laid?         Harvard   :
: Qu'est-ce qui est grand, fort, faible...                 doesn't   :
: Connais pas! Connais pas!                                 think    :
:                                                             so     :
: Mikhail Zeleny                                                     :
: 872 Massachusetts Ave., Apt. 707                                   :
: Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139           (617) 661-8151            :
: email zeleny@zariski.harvard.edu or zeleny@HUMA1.BITNET            :
:                                                                    :
'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`


