h a l f b a k e r yWe got your practicality ... right here.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
As noted in annotations, apparently chatbots are fully baked. This idea is thus repackaged as only the phone sex generator component described at the end.
The whole concept of the Turing test is an artificial intelligence which simulates conversation so well that you cannot tell whether it is
fake or real. Arguably, it is an unrealistic criterion for a good AI, as conversation is a synthesis of culture and sociability - probably the two greatest achievements of our species.
However, conversationis often fairly simple bewteen denziens of text based virtual reality simulators or chat rooms. An AI which appeared as a person inhabiting the room could quiety lurk for days or months, learning the rules of conversation. Eventually, it could start to interact, basing comments on those which preceded and those which followed. The comments would be syncretic creations parsed together from other comments which had been heard or stored - in fact maybe _all_ the comments.
Of course, the trick would be the generation of good rules. Idiosyncratic phrases encountered only once or particular to one individual should not be used by the AI. An occasional typ[o is de rigeur.
The goal of tricking the simple MUCKERS is worthy in itself. However an application of the mature AI, combined with good voice recognition and speech synthesis (perhaps a russian accent would disguise some voice idiosyncracies), would be an artificial phone sex generator. Phone sex and its analogs on the internet are lucrative businesses - all the more so if you don't actually have to hire and deal with living human beings to provide it! I would not object if francium were incorporated somehow.
(?) Turing test page.
http://cogsci.ucsd....aygin/tt/ttest.html
Talk to the nice program. [bungston, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 06 2004]
Take your pick of teachable bots
http://www.spacepor...laven/teachable.htm
[thumbwax, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 06 2004]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
"AI to fool the furry folks." |
|
| |
An artificial phone sex dialog generator would need a TTS engine with... different characteristics, unless the dialog was being read by a human actor, in which case surely the human can generate their own dialog? Unless the purpose is just to pass a Turing test. |
|
| |
This idea is nothing new. This is what most AI researching in the field of nature language processing is working towards, including my own research. The problem is doing it and having hardware that can do it quick enough. |
|
| |
I think this is a big problem with half-bakery. People often list ideas which arent done yet, but are in the process of being developed, simply because they lack the knowledge in that field. study. |
|
| |
PS - Jutta, yes delete please. its in the oven. |
|
| |
Ironfrog, I admit to grumpyness because of missing lunch. A guy who has reinvented the wheel has still invented the wheel. The fact that I am not as versed in this field as somehone who does AI research should not be grounds for deletion. I would venture to say that 99.44% of ideas on the HB could have holes ripped in them by an expert in the field. HB is for enthusiastic amateurs. If you want to talk shop I'm sure there are dedicated AI sites. I suggest that you devote your time here to development of a productive use for old car tires, or possibly something incorportating francium. |
|
| |
That said I will move this to some phone sex category as suggested, if I can find such a category. But _that_ said, I hope the move does not prompt Jutta to delete notes. They are fine. |
|
| |
For this purpose, it might be best if the thing mostly just moaned and panted. The "AI" could then be very simple. It could still respond to voices -- filling pauses, responding to signs of excitement, and so on -- but it would do so mostly incoherently, by splicing together various noises and dirty sentence-fragments. For real verisimilitude, it might throw in occasional gum-smacks or stifled yawns. |
|
| |
It's funny how people like [bungston] have these very specific ideas of what "HB is for". The help file says "Generally, the more you know (and can explain!) about the technology behind your idea, the more interesting the idea will be. As always, when in doubt, write about what you know." What part of that says "enthusiastic amateurs" to you? For my part, if 99.44% of ideas can have holes ripped in them by an expert in the field, by all means let's rip those holes and delete those ideas if the holes are big enough. |
|
| |
That said, [ironfroggy] is being a mite unfair. If people can identify a particular domain, such as phone sex, where a limited engine can replace a human conversation partner, then that's more interesting. |
|
| |
Now, the idea of bots for online text sexchat is well developed already, so all that's really being added here is the idea of doing it on an actual voice line, so it's not really anything super great -- but it's not quite as bad as you're making out. |
|
| |
I read the title as "Phone Sex Artificial Insemination" ewwwwwah. |
|
| |
"Phone sex Al" - I was wondering what Gore was going to do next... |
|
| |
Hands up all those people in the room who have *actually* used a phone sex service, or have had phone sex with a partner, so have some remote idea whether this might actually work? (I, for one, have not; I prefer contact sports, however old-fashioned that may make me.) |
|
| |
Phone sex with a partner works extremely well if there's a high degree of empathy. Never tried the other sort. |
|
| |
[Helium] - Insert Some Dna Now. |
|
| |