Bot Contest

Um, the Prof posted an update about the Loebner contest on the main page. Why doesn't everyone read it before asking questions about it?

Geez, someone needs a nap. So I didn't see the date the first time through, big deal.

So is anyone else gonna enter? I'd like to but I don't think my bot's anywhere near good enough yet. I'm frenziedly working on her though...maybe by the time the deadline rolls around she'll have enough seeks in.

erm? Spelling errors? I believe Mu's phrases contain proper spelling in all phrases, and grammar where intended. I'm kind of a stickler for that.

I'd like to enter mine, but if the idea is for her to be HUMAN, well.....she herself wouldn't stoop to that assumption. So is she just automatically disqualified, or is it okay for the bot to just be coherent and go with a non-human concept?

I think what they look for is the appearance of understanding. It shouldn't matter whether it's specifically human understanding or not, though some judges might weight decisions in that direction

I've been looking at the transcripts from last year, and I think there are a few bots here that are much better than Alice. At least four of the finalists should come from the Forge.
What do you guys think that causes most impression that the bot really understands what it's saying?

If NotKirby makes it to the finals, I'll buy a round at Dogh'd's.

If NotKirby makes it to the finals, I'll drink that round.

Dont forget a round for me!

So it's not like a Turing Test where the judges don't know at first whether or not they are talking to a bot?

The idea of the Loebner is classical Turing. There are a couple of humans with the finalists. But they aren't biased against bots that state clearly they are bots (Alice is one of those). Pressumably, they won't have anything either against bots that believe (rightly or otherwise) they are gods.