Thread

Vote on which of Hacker News' challenges for AI have been met

202 points · 271 comments · stabbles

ErrantX · 1790879836 · focus · HN ↗
What is interesting to me is in 2016 people were like; pass Turing test, write code, order me a coffee.
And even in 2024 the themes are similar, generally more complex or specific about the coding/turing/action test.
But in 2026 a huge shift, we have things like; can open a physical door, emulates human pettiness convincingly, makes novel scientific breakthroughs.
That alone tells you a lot IMO
1. ianjbutler · 1790882681 · focus · HN ↗
  Sigh, the whole "obviously the turing test is solved" meme is annoying.
  Like, if we meant that it convincingly masquerades as a shitposter, ok. But everyone still bitches about AI slop, and everyone knows the writing is still bad. How does that even work if the turing test is obviously solved?
  More to the point though, if you grill SOTA models on counterfactuals, causal world-models etc, you'll trip them up in a way that actually will not work on ESL students and children. Certainly there's no way to find a person that struggles with that and is also capable of cheerful fluent erudite discussion about astrophysics with perfect grammar. Yes, it's getting harder obviously.. but detecting machines with determined, focused and intelligent interrogation remains pretty easy. If nothing else, the models are cooperative where people wouldn't be and that's a signal too.
  The best progress we've made is that most people do agree that this doesn't practically matter very much, i.e. we generally recognize the stakes were always overstated. But the constant vague appeals to common-sense that "of course it's a solved problem!" always feels naive or fake.
  1. johnsmith1840 · 1790897296 · focus · HN ↗
    I was just thinking how anyone still thought AI didn't pass turing already. There's been literal papers proving average people cannot tell reliably.
    Barrin92 · 1790905262 · focus · HN ↗
    >There's been literal papers proving average people cannot tell reliably.
    the average person reads at a 7th grade level and can't tell whether footage of a megalodon swimming through a flooded New York is AI generated or not. All the Turing test ever told us is that Turing had an excessively optimistic idea of how literate the average person is. I have a conversation like this every time a new version comes out and they always go the same way:
    <a href="https://pastebin.com/NjfCLSXa" rel="nofollow">https://pastebin.com/NjfCLSXa
    artisin · 1790909346 · focus · HN ↗
    this gave me a good chuckle.
    > Oh, right. Aramaic. My mistake—I somehow read "Italian" and didn't question it. > I can try, although my Aramaic is very rusty. Do you mean Classical/Syriac Aramaic, or one of the modern varieties?

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.