Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.consciousness,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.philosophy.meta,rec.arts.books
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!casaba.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!dcs.gla.ac.uk!unix.brighton.ac.uk!mjs14
From: mjs14@unix.brighton.ac.uk (shute)
Subject: Re: Penrose and Searle (was Re: Roger Penrose's fixed ideas)
Message-ID: <1994Dec12.172845.10608@unix.brighton.ac.uk>
Organization: University of Brighton, UK
References: <D0CyHs.2KI@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <jqbD0DByv.H6t@netcom.com> <D0EpC9.4vB@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Distribution: inet
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 17:28:45 GMT
Lines: 24
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.skeptic:97839 comp.ai.philosophy:23580 sci.philosophy.meta:15523

>In article <jqbD0DByv.H6t@netcom.com> jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter) writes:
>>Ok, consider every "poster" to c.a.p.  Any of these is conceivably driven
>>by a program.  What criteria do you use to judge their consciousness?
>>If you say "I know they are really human.", how will you know when
>>I *do* present you with a TT-passing program [...]

This prospect has been raised, of course (and often with a quarter of
a smiley attached), in this newsgroup.

It's only just hit me, the horror of what this event will entail!

Every researcher with a version of Eliza-2010, HAL-9, or whatever, will
connect his pride and joy up to comp.ai.philosophy, just to see how many
of us detect the presence of a machine in the threads.  Some machines will
do better than others, and some will occasionally throw a wobbly (due to
previously undetected design faults becoming manifest to the designer).

I forcast that the advent of the TT-passing AI program will spell the end
of comp.ai.philosophy as a usable newsgroup :-(

(Just my thoughts, for what they are worth).
-- 

Malcolm SHUTE.         (The AM Mollusc:   v_@_ )        Disclaimer: all
