For those not familiar with the book, (other than wikipedia'n it), Robert Penrose attempts to show why what happens in our brains is not algorithmic at all (and, therefore, strong AI is a dumb idea).
It's beautifully written, however, when I see examples such as this log, or the fact that we have an entire industry devoted to the idea that the brain is algorithmic (psychology), I kinda start to think that his thesis is wrong.
It would seem that exchanges like these indicate the opposite. These chat bots have no understanding and anything that seems like it is just some cheap trick or other. It can't be called intelligence, in the same way we speak of human intelligence. Neither would pass the turing test.
However, I am aware that the meaning of AI is always pushed to "whatever we can't yet do". Yet, in this case it's hardly justified to think that these chatbots even slightly challenge Penrose's thesis.
I read the book too BTW, loved it. I'm not sure if he's right, but it's nevertheless a wonderful book and heartily recommend it to all.
For those not familiar with the book, (other than wikipedia'n it), Robert Penrose attempts to show why what happens in our brains is not algorithmic at all (and, therefore, strong AI is a dumb idea).
It's beautifully written, however, when I see examples such as this log, or the fact that we have an entire industry devoted to the idea that the brain is algorithmic (psychology), I kinda start to think that his thesis is wrong.