Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newshunter!cosy.sbg.ac.at!news.netway.at!Amsterdam.Infonet!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!news.otenet.gr!not-for-mail
From: ilias <at_n...@pontos.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: LISP - 2 exponent 0 = 1
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 19:05:27 +0300
Organization: An OTEnet S.A. customer
Lines: 132
Message-ID: <amndk7$1d9$1@usenet.otenet.gr>
References: <am64ua$j6h$1@usenet.otenet.gr> <7fe97cc4.0209190043.eed48db@posting.google.com> <7b8f89d6.0209190934.5e94f860@posting.google.com> <amegak$as9$2@usenet.otenet.gr> <y6cptv8ftla.fsf@octagon.mrl.nyu.edu> <amfo22$j8o$1@usenet.otenet.gr> <y6c65x0fpo8.fsf@octagon.mrl.nyu.edu> <amhabp$oto$1@usenet.otenet.gr> <y6ck7lf3wz0.fsf@octagon.mrl.nyu.edu> <ammg8i$4sd$1@usenet.otenet.gr> <y6cofao1zjm.fsf@octagon.mrl.nyu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: athe720-b-multi-500.otenet.gr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: usenet.otenet.gr 1032796616 1449 62.103.218.246 (23 Sep 2002 15:56:56 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@otenet.gr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 15:56:56 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826
X-Accept-Language: el, en-us, en

Marco Antoniotti wrote:
> Ok, one last time.  I promise.  I just cannot resist.
> 
> ilias <at_n...@pontos.net> writes:
> 
>         ... Some discussion on `Turing Test' elided ...
> 
>>>>>>>A simple Google search will fill in the details.
>>>>>>>Since it has been suggested up here that you are actually an A.I.,
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>fact that you show ignorance of the Turing Test could be seen as a
>>>>>>>ruse by your programmer(s) to fool the denizens of C.L.L. into
>>>>>>>thinking that you are actually human.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>sounds like 'paranoia'.
>>>>>
>>>>>Do you mean that you are paranoic or that I am paranoic.
>>>>
>>>>"could be seen" => paranoia.
>>>
>>>I am sorry, I do not understand this comment.
>>
>>I said   : "sounds like 'paranoia'"
>>you asked: "Do you mean that you are paranoic or that I am paranoic"
>>I quoted : ("could be seen"), the part of the text to which the term
>>'paranoia' refers.
> 
> Yes, but I asked you whether you think if you or I are paranoic.  Am I?

extract the essence.

>>>>>Are we like Eliza and Parry?
>>>>irrlevant.
>>>True.  But a little bit of humor has never hurt anybody. (Has it?)
>>i try to assimilate 'Turing Test'.
>>humor irrelevant.
> Evidently you have not read "The Name of the Rose" by Umberto Eco.
> Have you?

irrelevant.

>         ... More stuff elided ...
ok

>>>>>>What is 'Turing-Complete'?
>>>>>Essentially, a programming language L is Turing Complete if there
>>>>>exists an algorithm transforming a program in L into the code for a
>>>>>Turing machine.
>>>>what is a 'Turing machine'?
>>>A good reference id "J. E. Hopcroft and J. D. Ullman, Introduction to
>>>Automata Theory, Languages and Computation, Addison-Wesley, 1979".
>>>It is just a book, but some books are good.
>>you cannot explain 'Turing-machine'.
>I can, the explanation is just too long to fit in this Usenet
>posting.  But, unlike Fermat, I have a constructive proof on my desk
>that I can.  It is just a book.
ok

>>>>>>I cannot extract a meaning, based on the information 'Turing-Test' you
>>>>>>just gave me.
>>>>>I can only point the direction.  Books and Google are ther for this
>>>>you don't pass my 'Turing Test'.
>>>Then you maintain that I am a machine.  How do you purport to go ahead
>>>and prove to others up here that I am a machine?
>>i don't maintain that you are a machine.
>>i've placed "Turing Test" between ''.
>>My "Turing Test" - 'The didactic capabilities of the Test Target'
>If it is 'Turing Test' how can it be yours?

you try to 'fuck' me.

>>>>>reason.  Everybody has time constraints which are best spent doing
>>>>>real work instead of quibbling on minutiae of the Common Lisp
>>>>>specification.
>>>>remark irrelevant.
>>>It depends.  It may be irrelevant for you.
>>context: me.
>>remark irrelevant.
>>
>>>But suppose it wasn't?
>>>What would you do differently if you found the remark relevant?
>>follow-up remarks irrelevant.
> Irrelevant to you.  Possibly not to others.  Getting touchy?

irrelevant.

>>>>>My version of the Turing test would ask to discriminate between
>>>>>relevant and irrelevant issue in the line of questions and answers.
>>>>>And note that I would be the judge. :)
>>>>thus the quality of your test depends on the quality of your judge.
>>>Well, I trust my judgement, hence my test is going to be pretty good.
>>>
>>>>sounds not good.
>>>
>>>That is your problem.  Remember: I am the judge, not you.
>>
>>your test is already running.
>>and i've passed.
>Maybe.  I'll leave you with the doubt.  Do you ever doubt your lines
>of reasoning?

yes.

>>>>>Cheers
>>>>
>>>>Turing Test: comparing A.I. against H.I. (Human Intelligence), judged
>>>>by human intelligence.
>>>>I think i don't like the 'Turing-Test'.
>>>Why don't you like it?
>>fact's already given. reasons:
>>- comaring A.I. against H.I.
>>- judged by H.I.
>>construct 'Turing Test': provisional rejected.
>>
>>>In some ways it is a playful game put forth by
>>>one of the great minds of our century to address a deep question.
>>
>>cannot judge.
> 
>If you cannot judge, 

different context.

> why are you rejecting it on the basis of just two
>sentences?

"provisional rejected"

> 
> Cheers
>