6 ms·
> but is still useful, relevant The proposed test for responsiveness actually does test an aspect of responsiveness. The problem here is only in the definition
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> but is still useful, relevant
The proposed test for responsiveness actually does test an aspect of responsiveness. The problem here is only in the definition of the variable to test: Yes, "responsiveness" isn't well defined.
The Turing "test" however doesn't test intelligent behavior at all, so the problem is BOTH in the definition of the tested variable, AND in the actual test.
- Ukv 3y ago> The problem here is only in the definition of the variable to test: Yes, "responsiveness" isn't well defined. That's all that was really required for the purpose of that analogy - arguing that there can still be useful/relevant tests without agreement on definition, as a response specifically to your "Without a definition [...]" claim. But, I do think you could equally say that the responsiveness test is actually testing speed of the computer or speed of the connection, in addition to some defining responsiveness in a way that isn't related to click-to-new-content speed.