<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Wager on the Turing Test: Why I Think I Will Win</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kurzweilai.net/a-wager-on-the-turing-test-why-i-think-i-will-win/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/a-wager-on-the-turing-test-why-i-think-i-will-win</link>
	<description>Accelerating Intelligence</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 02:04:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: xxdanbrowne</title>
		<link>http://www.kurzweilai.net/a-wager-on-the-turing-test-why-i-think-i-will-win/comment-page-1#comment-2549</link>
		<dc:creator>xxdanbrowne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2011 18:22:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kurzweilai.net/a-wager-on-the-turing-test-why-i-think-i-will-win#comment-2549</guid>
		<description>Hi Ray,
I&#039;m very excited to see Watson play jeopardy soon and like you I think you will win the bet with Mitch. Where I break ranks, however, is in suggesting that passing the Turing test per se makes a computer system equivalent to general human intelligence. Instead it could reasonably be argued that it will make a computer equivalent to a functional idiot savant who can answer questions on a variety of topics. Could it, however, philosophize on it&#039;s own and synthesize from disparate blocks of information? I doubt it if the minimum bar of the Turing test is considered. That said, I both believe that the ability to philosophize and synthesize could be designed in rather quickly (less than a decade) after the turing test is passed and secondly that a chatbot agent like Watson with just a handful of improvements is a &quot;good enough&quot; tool for most humans and one with synthetic reasoning skills would make an excellent research assistant.

Exciting times!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Ray,<br />
I&#8217;m very excited to see Watson play jeopardy soon and like you I think you will win the bet with Mitch. Where I break ranks, however, is in suggesting that passing the Turing test per se makes a computer system equivalent to general human intelligence. Instead it could reasonably be argued that it will make a computer equivalent to a functional idiot savant who can answer questions on a variety of topics. Could it, however, philosophize on it&#8217;s own and synthesize from disparate blocks of information? I doubt it if the minimum bar of the Turing test is considered. That said, I both believe that the ability to philosophize and synthesize could be designed in rather quickly (less than a decade) after the turing test is passed and secondly that a chatbot agent like Watson with just a handful of improvements is a &#8220;good enough&#8221; tool for most humans and one with synthetic reasoning skills would make an excellent research assistant.</p>
<p>Exciting times!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
