Re: Article - Why the Loebner Prize Will Never Be Won...

1. I started the competition for a number of purposes, which I
enumerate and discuss in my Response to Shieber
http://loebner.net/Prizef/In-response.html  One my the reasons was to
develop AI to do all work (I'm in favor of 100% unemployment). 
Another was so that I would become famous.  A third was to conduct a
sociological experiment.  Read the article.

2. I don't think it would be 'pointless' to try and find alternative
methods of creating human beings.  The techniques could be extended to
regenerate lost limbs, sensory and other organs, etc.

3. The basic question of the TT is "Can machines think?"  Developing
an artificial human is developing a (chemical) machine.  In any case,
Turing _specifically_ excluded only "men [and, I presume, women] born
in the normal manner."  Honoring Turing's idea, I therefore do _not_
exclude "men" and "women" _not_ "born in the normal manner."

HGL

"Fred Flintstone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> I assume you hold this competition every year because you want to try and
> motivate people to create artificially intelligent machines so they can be
> used as a tool to help mankind. It would be pointless to try and motivate
> people to try and find alternative methods of creating human beings. A human
> being is a human being regardless of how it was made, it will still have the
> same faults and the same rights of every other human being. Some would argue
> that an intelligent machine should still have rights, I'd have to agree but
> there is nothing to stop us from creating a machine that is intelligent but
> doesn't feel pain and really enjoys scrubbing the floor.