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

I don't really want to argue over where we draw the line between man and
machine. I'm just saying that we're going to have to be careful. We should
discourage creating artificial humans because people may see them as
machines that can be used and abused like the other machines they own.

Still, I don't think there are people out there that are trying to create an
artificial human because they want to win the Loebner prize. If somebody is
going to create an artificial human then they'll do it for other reasons.

All the best with your future competitions.





"Hugh Loebner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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.