> The Turing test is determined What does the Turing Test determine anyway? According to the paper, it is supposed to measure a machines intelligence, or rathe

> The Turing test is determined What does the Turing Test determine anyway? According to the paper, it is supposed to measure a machines intelligence, or rather more prosaically, answer the question "Can machines think?" But that isn't what the test measures. It measures how well a machine can trick a human into believing it is a person. So instead of measuring how well the machine does, the test instead measures how well the human does. That is the greatest flaw of the Turing Test, and the little "answer with silence" thought experiment is showcasing exactly that flaw. "Can a machine trick a human" and "Can a machine think" are 2 very different questions. Humans can, and have shown to, be tricked by ELIZA and even simpler chatterbots, engines that don't even use any kind of ML, just large bodies of prewritten text and a number of static rules. > by % of people who believe they are taking to a person. And what does that denote? Say I get 2 groups of people. One is tricked by ELIZA 80% of the time, the other is tricked by ELIZA 40% of the time. Does that show that ELIZA passed or failed? Neither. It shows that the outcome of the test depends as much, or even more, on the ability of the interrogator than it does on the quality of the machines responses. Imagine a litmus test (a chemical test to roughly determine the acidity of a solution), where the test result depends on who performs it, as much or even more than it does on the quality of the Litmus-Paper. No lab would use that test for obvious reasons.