vegeta@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 5 months agoResearchers claim GPT-4 passed the Turing testbgr.comexternal-linkmessage-square30fedilinkarrow-up160arrow-down133
arrow-up127arrow-down1external-linkResearchers claim GPT-4 passed the Turing testbgr.comvegeta@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 5 months agomessage-square30fedilink
minus-squaretourist@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up14·5 months ago The participants judged GPT-4 to be human a shocking 54 percent of the time. ELIZA, which was pre-programmed with responses and didn’t have an LLM to power it, was judged to be human just 22 percent of the time Okay, 22% is ridiculously high for ELIZA. I feel like any half sober adult could clock it as a bot by the third response, if not immediately. Try talking to the thing: https://web.njit.edu/~ronkowit/eliza.html I refuse to believe that 22% didn’t misunderstand the task or something.
minus-squareKISSmyOSFeddit@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·5 months ago14% of people can’t do anything more complicated than deleting an email on a computer. 26% can’t use a computer at all. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/computer-skill-levels/ So right off the bat, 40% probably don’t even know what a chatbot is.
minus-squareDowncount@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·5 months ago Okay, 22% is ridiculously high for ELIZA. I feel like any half sober adult could clock it as a bot by the third response, if not immediately. I did some stuff with Eliza back then. One time I set up an Eliza database full of insults and hooked it up to my AIM account. It went so well, I had to apologize to a lot of people who thought I was drunken or went crazy. Eliza wasn’t thaaaaat bad.
minus-squareCaptainBasculin@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·5 months agoThis is the same bot. There’s no way this passed the test. .
minus-squaretechnocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·5 months agoIt was a 5 minute test. People probably spent 4 of those minutes typing their questions. This is pure pseudo-science.
minus-squaredustyData@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·5 months agoYou underestimate how dumb some people can be.
Okay, 22% is ridiculously high for ELIZA. I feel like any half sober adult could clock it as a bot by the third response, if not immediately.
Try talking to the thing: https://web.njit.edu/~ronkowit/eliza.html
I refuse to believe that 22% didn’t misunderstand the task or something.
14% of people can’t do anything more complicated than deleting an email on a computer.
26% can’t use a computer at all.
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/computer-skill-levels/
So right off the bat, 40% probably don’t even know what a chatbot is.
I did some stuff with Eliza back then. One time I set up an Eliza database full of insults and hooked it up to my AIM account.
It went so well, I had to apologize to a lot of people who thought I was drunken or went crazy.
Eliza wasn’t thaaaaat bad.
This is the same bot. There’s no way this passed the test.
.
It was a 5 minute test. People probably spent 4 of those minutes typing their questions.
This is pure pseudo-science.
You underestimate how dumb some people can be.