> you did not do the necessary due diligence to demonstrate I did all the necessary due dilligence. I was perfectly aware that the paper used a variation on th

> you did not do the necessary due diligence to demonstrate I did all the necessary due dilligence. I was perfectly aware that the paper used a variation on the imitation game. I also read Turings paper long before this discussion started (I think I was in highschool when I first stumbled upon it). That's how I knew that it is easy to come up with basically the same thought experiment, without even changing any of the games rules. > For example, you reply "Wrong." to a subjective evaluation I've made. Because in my subjective evaluation it isn't a weak thought experiment, so I am fully within my rights to disagree with your evaluation.