Russian Chatbot Passes Turing Test (Sort of) 236
CurtMonash writes "According to Ina Fried, a chatbot is making the rounds that successfully emulates an easily-laid woman. As such, it dupes lonely Russian males into divulging personal and financial details at a rate of one every three minutes. All jokes aside — and a lot of them come quickly to mind — that sure sounds like the Turing Test to me.
Of course, there are caveats. Reports of scary internet security threats are commonly overblown. There are some pretty obvious ways the chatbot could be designed to lessen its AI challenge by seeking to direct the conversation. And finally, while we are told the bot has fooled a few victims, we don't know its overall success rate at fooling the involuntary Turing "judges.""
This test is very easy (Score:5, Interesting)
A decade ago I wrote a perl script for sirc that had 40 sentences and would just reply one picked at random (uniformly) every time it would get a private message. Hence it was not taking into account neither what was the message it just received to it (a la Eliza) nor what it had said before. It was not even waiting before replying, hence would type the respones in a tenth of a second.
It happened several times that people would talk with it for more than an hour. If I remember correctly the record was 1h45min ...
For the Turing test, the tester has a strong prior that the testee may be a computer. This is not the case here, and the prior for this to happen is so low that it's impossible for a layman to come with that explanation. What happens is that people think inconsistencies in the speech of their interlocutor is due to technical problems (sending message to the wrong person, lag, complexity of the program the person use, etc.)
Re:Who Loves You, Baby? Putin Loves You, Baby !! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Eliza says- (Score:2, Interesting)
"Nice weather."
"Yes, nice weather."
"It might rain this afternoon."
"Rain? You think so?"
"You're elizing again!"
Re:Jubii had such a robot (Score:5, Interesting)
On top of that, there is the whole chat medium. Anyone who has ever done a lot of IM/IRC/whatever knows that it's not uncommon to type the wrong thing in the wrong window/channel, so the occasional out of nowhere sentence that would never pass in a one-on-one environment, will pass there because the signal to noise ratio is lower.
Still, I'd be interested to see the code, and see how well it deals with non sequiturs.
It's actually not as hard as you think. (Score:5, Interesting)
To plant him, we simply made a free page on some blog with some personal details and put his IM up there and waited to see what happened.
We eventually shut him down because people were becoming way too personal with him. One girl had an ongoing series of conversations with him about how she was recently raped. His mouth became rather foul when my roommate decided to have him initiate a conversation (he had a whitelist of known 'admin' screen names who could then order him to say something specific to a specific screen name) with screen names linked to hate groups. Another guy just wanted to convert him to evangelical Christian. It was way too simple to write a bot to make many, many people think is real. Some people did figure it out, so if someone ever brought up 'bot' in a conversation they were immediately added to a blacklist so as not to corrupt the conversation database.
The biggest giveaways? "u type too fast" (we eventually added a delay to solve that issue) and "u only type something when I do" (by this time I had already decided it was time to shut down the bot for good). It was a lot of fun until he started hurting people... if I ever resurrect him he will have a pre-set kill limit.
~Ben
Re:The ever-rising bar on true AI (Score:1, Interesting)
I take it you've never actually been in a chat room. What you just described (and what Turing originally devised) is exactly what happens in every chat room I've ever been in. The room is filled with 40-50 people. Some of whom are men, some women and some bots. The goal for the man is to ignore the other men and block the bots. Going into it, every man KNOWS these are the rules of the game. Bots posing as women.
I haven't been to a chat room in a few years now but back in 2003 or 2004, I was fooled by a chat bot for a good 15 minutes or so. I was initially suspicious, then less wary, then convinced I was talking to a human before something gave it away. That's when I realized that chat bots already HAD passed the Turing test, exactly as designed.
Think of their value -- not just in scamming people out of credit cards. But all the consumer products which will one day have a human like interface for people... chat bots are that proto-AI interface.
Re:This test is very easy (Score:4, Interesting)
Intention (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Jubii had such a robot (Score:3, Interesting)
Somehow I find that idea even more disturbing.