From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!utgpu!pindor Mon Mar  9 18:35:19 EST 1992
Article 4274 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!utgpu!pindor
>From: pindor@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Andrzej Pindor)
Subject: Re: Monkey Room
Message-ID: <1992Mar5.145435.11897@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Organization: UTCS Public Access
References: <9203031955.AA11770@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <68421@netnews.upenn.edu> <1992Mar4.210902.28435@psych.toronto.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1992 14:54:35 GMT
Lines: 23

In article <1992Mar4.210902.28435@psych.toronto.edu> michael@psych.toronto.edu (Michael Gemar) writes:
>
>Well, it shows that the Turing Test is not infallible.  This in itself is
>a useful reminder for folks here.  It also shows that arguments against
>the "Turing Test" results that were posted here a while ago, in which
>some laypeople thought programs were actually computers, are at best
>ad hoc.  There is no *clear* way to conduct a Turing Test, and no way
>that will yield perfect results.
>
You must be very young if you still look for perfection. Prepare yourself for
a big shock :-).
(Sorry, couldn't restrain myself)

>- michael
>
>


-- 
Andrzej Pindor
University of Toronto
Computing Services
pindor@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca


