I find the game design to be lacking. Not that they aren’t fun. Not that I dislike Link. It’s just child’s play. I mostly played those titles with my kids when they were little. My kids loved Zelda Breath of Wild and I told them about my childhood with the golden cartridge.
Russia didn't lose its veto when the USSR collapsed and neither would the UK lose it in such a case. If the UK was in danger of losing its veto it would never allow Scottish independence.
I have to challenge the paper authors' understanding of the Turing test. For an AI system to pass the Turing test its output needs to be indistinguishable from a human's. In other words, the rate of picking the AI system as human should be equal to the rate of picking the human. If in an experiment the AI system is picked at a rate higher than 50% it does not pass the Turing test (as the authors seem to believe) because another human can use this knowledge to conclude that the system being picked is not really human.
Also, I would go one step further and claim that to pass the Turing test an AI system should be indistinguishable from a human when judged by people trained in making such a distinction. I doubt that they used such people in the experiment.
I doubt that any AI system available today, or in the foreseeable future, can pass the test as I qualify it above.
People are constantly being fooled by bots in forums like Reddit and this one. That's good enough for me to consider the Turing test passed.
It also makes me consider it an inadequate test to begin with, since all classes of humans including domain experts can be fooled and have been in the past. The Turing test has always said more about the human participants than the machine.
The free encyclopedia is an advertisement for a nonprofit that does a lot of things: https://wikimediafoundation.org/what-we-do/. They manage costs of producing the encyclopedia by using volunteer labor. They operate a similar model as nature documentaries that drive donations for conservation and climate groups. These are all good things - still an advertisement.
The killer argument at the time (and even now most likely) is that screen readers could not distinguish whether the table was used for layout or for data and therefore sight-impaired users would have trouble.
The argument doesn't make sense because it is not too hard for a screenreader to understand whether a table is used for layout and even if it was hard the problem would more easily be solved by just adding an attribute to the table to indicate that it is used for layout.
reply