[bl0b]

> I personally regularly use the “voice” version of chatGPT to brainstorm with it while I walk my dog. We sped past the Turing test so fast that no one even beat an eyelash about it

I don't think that just because the author has a pseudo-conversation with ChatGPT using voice as the interface means we've passed the Turing test.

They don't seem to be actively interrogating ChatGPT to determine whether it's a human or not - something that I'd expect would still be quite easy to do. And, as I understand it, the Turing test could be administered over text.

[rogerclark]

The truth is that the Turing test turned out to be useless. Whether we have passed it or not has no bearing on my life or anyone else's. The way I talk to ChatGPT isn't the way I talk to a real person, despite it already being capable of communicating with human language, teaching me things, and helping with my work and daily life. No real person would tolerate a turn-by-turn exchange of 2 minute monologues, but that's (apparently) what I want from an AI.

And millions of people are fooled into thinking GPT is a real person every day, with spam and robocalls and social media bots. Maybe it won't fool everyone all the time, but it can fool some people a lot of the time. And it's only going to get more sophisticated. The only ones concerned about the Turing test are 70 year old GOFAI professors -- everyone else is dealing with the practical realities of computers suddenly having language capabilities.