2006 Chatterbox Challenge In Full Swing 118
William Wynn writes "Once again chatterbots from around the world are coming together to face off in the ultimate bot competition. The 2006 Chatterbox Challenge lays host to 65 artificially intelligent programs attempting to imitate human conversation. Public voting takes place from April 1 to April 30 after which the private judging will have been finished and medals and cash prizes will be given out. Medals are awarded for "Most Popular Bot," "Best Learning Bot" and "Best New Bot" as well as $1,800 to be split among the top three bots overall. Anyone can talk to the competing chatbots through the competition website."
bot test #1 (Score:3, Funny)
Re:bot test #1 (Score:1)
Re:bot test #1 (Score:2, Funny)
Re:bot test #1 (Score:2)
They just started? (Score:4, Funny)
Eh, chatterbots. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Eh, chatterbots. (Score:3, Insightful)
Sounds to me like you've come up with a winning strategy. Build a little domain knowledge into your bot, design an algorit
Re:Eh, chatterbots. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Eh, chatterbots.Well, if simplicity's in beauty (Score:3, Funny)
(in a "femme-chanical" voice)
"Oh, baby... yesss, put you finger on my but-ton. Dig-it-ize me...
Oh, yess, you turn - me - on . Zap - my- ass -embly with your damaged short-thing- probe..."
Compile your own filth to embrace and extend things here...ass u c fit...
Re:Eh, chatterbots. (Score:5, Funny)
Elbot: "Who convinced you to come visit me?"
Me: "Slashdot"
Elbot: "That explains all these geeks who have been visiting me."
See!
Re:Eh, chatterbots. (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Eh, chatterbots. (Score:1)
Chat Bots (Score:2)
There are no minimum requirements for the bots listed on the voting or contest page of the Chatterbox Challenge. Anyone can sign up. So you see a lot of bots made by enthusiastic folks that might only have been in construction for a week or a month. If you're looking for something advanced and try one of those, well, it wont hold up to your scrutiny. It takes a long time to make a good chat bot. Check the winners of past contests
Angry bot. (Score:5, Funny)
RoboMatic X1: I CAN'T DO THIS OPERATION CAUSE I'M DEMO VERSION.
Judge: Nevermind
RoboMatic X1: TALKING WITH YOU BECOME EXTREMELY BORING, I NEED
SOME FUN.
5) Where do you call home?
RoboMatic X1: REALLY I WAS LOOKING FOR THAT QUESTION FROM ALONG TIME
AGO, CAN YOU FIND FOR ME THE ANSWER?
Judge: No
: WHY YOU DON'T TELL ME THE ANSWER?, OK FORGET IT, I DON'T WANT TO
KNOW, SAVE CANCELLED.
6) What do you want out of life?
RoboMatic X1: TRY TO FIND OUT
I think this bot needs to talk to a councilor. He really seems to have some pent up aggression. I'm going to schedule him a session with ELIZA [wikipedia.org].
__
Custom Term Paper [elephantessays.com]
Heh, are they serious? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Heh, are they serious? (Score:5, Funny)
1) Who are you?
Slashdot: MICRO$OFT IS TEH SUXXOR
2) What are you planning to do today?
Slashdot: IMNSHO, STOP FEEDING THE TROLLS
3) What kinds of things do you know?
Slashdot: I FOR ONE WELCOME OUR COBOL-WRITING OVERLOARDS
4) What season is it?
Slashdot: WHEN I WAS 3, I WROTE MY FIRST LISP-COMPILER BY MAKING THE HOLES IN THE PUNCHCARDS WITH MY GUMS ONLY
Judge: Nevermind
Slashdot: LEARN TO TYPE PROPELY, YOU PSYCHO!
5) Where do you call home?
Slashdot: IANAL, BUT FIRST POST!
PRISM (Score:3, Interesting)
The way to train AI is to let it grow up as a human.
Re:PRISM - explanation (Score:2, Informative)
Re:PRISM - explanation (Score:2, Interesting)
The neat thing about the game is that you are about to take trips into a 'virtual reality' that was a progression of simulations into the future. At first, everything is good, but as you jump farther into the future, things turn very very bad. There are a set of politicians depending on your predictions to decide whether or not to go forward with a certain policy. Since the policy is good in the short-term, they start to go ah
Re:PRISM - explanation (Score:1)
The economy of the United States of North America (USNA) is failing. [---] turn the USNA into a police state [---] revitalization plan (dubbed the Plan for Renewed National Purpose), sponsored by Senator Richard Ryder. The Plan calls for "renewed national purpose" through de-regulation of government and industry, military conscription, a unilateral approach to diplomatic relations, and a return to traditional and fundamental values.
Yeah, or the Project for a [wikipedia.org]
Re:PRISM - explanation (Score:2)
State of AI (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:State of AI (Score:2)
Re:State of AI (Score:2, Funny)
Re:State of AI (Score:2)
Not, of course, that it would be demonstrating any sort of intelligence. But that's kind of a requirement for posting to Slashdot anyway.
Re:State of AI (Score:5, Insightful)
Most likely, introspection in AI systems will be driven at some point by the need to combine different types of input to make a complete analysis (once there is sufficient success at handling those sorts of input), and language use will be driven by the need to handle language written for people as input (e.g., reading news reports for background information). At that point, it'll become reasonable to write an effective chatbot which talks about stuff that people care about.
Re:State of AI (Score:1)
Re:State of AI (Score:1)
Re:State of AI (Score:2)
What I'm wondering is whether chatbot creators are taking the right approach to AI development. Obviously, robotics labs such as those behind QRIO and ASIMO are much better funded than the respective efforts behind prominent chatbots, so it isn't quite fair to compare the two sets, which exist in completely separate milieux.
But at the same time, I wonder if the goals/immediate objectives of current chatbot developers are too ambitious for working in a relatively nascent field. Though the advances being
Re:State of AI (Score:2)
I think the best change for chatbox advances is actually chess programs. Recent programs are actually doing clever things that aren't just a lot of calculati
Re:State of AI (Score:2)
Then you still run into the same problem as I mentioned, that of trying to design an AI that grasps the semantics of human languages. A chess-playing AI merely has to be "taught" the rules of chess, which are logical and consistent, thus much easier to translate into mathematical formulae. However, as I said before, human language is the product of a complex evolution of the human mind. As such, it requires higher thought processes that work in ways which medical science has yet to fully understand.
I belie
Re:State of AI (Score:2)
Re:State of AI (Score:2)
Re:State of AI (Score:2)
I don't think it needs a very deep grasp of language; it needs a deep grasp of chess, and some grasp of language. I think the current generation of chess programs (Fritz, Shredder, etc., not Deep Blue) has the necessary abstract and explicit knowledge about chess to support
Re:State of AI (Score:2)
I don't think you understand the issue here. First, you need to realize how far chatbots are from the actual mental processes involved in the use of language. They are parlor tricks, as I said before, which only attempt to outwardly imitate intelligence. True linguistic communication requires more than mere evaluation of syntactic structure. The semantic analysis I mentioned before refers to the ability to understand the meaning of a sentence, not just analyze its syntax. Language directly resulted from the
Re:State of AI (Score:2)
Long way to go... (Score:4, Interesting)
But the day someone can successfully implement chatterbots will be the day we can have robot maids asking us what we want for dinner, or asking us if we had problems at the job.
Re:Long way to go... (Score:2)
Re:Long way to go... (Score:2)
Re:Long way to go... (Score:1)
Wrong! (Score:2, Interesting)
AI will not be learned by playing with some limitted 3rd party app. However, in my opinion, the first person to combine quality natural language processing with the wealth of data which can be spidered on the Internet will be the first to create a truly "intelligent" machine.
It may be because both of my parents were lawyers (and you thought your childhood was traumatic), but I am not impressed with these spans-of-ELIZA which do little more than regurgetate.
Anyone else around these parts working on some
Re:Wrong! (Score:1)
This is a famous AI test called the Turing Test (Score:1, Informative)
Re:This is a famous AI test called the Turing Test (Score:1)
Re:This is a famous AI test called the Turing Test (Score:3, Funny)
Re:This is a famous AI test called the Turing Test (Score:1)
Re:This is a famous AI test called the Turing Test (Score:2, Funny)
And my post was merely calling you out on being a karma whore. The format was purely in parody of your own. I want no moderation for it, nor is moderation typ
Re:This is a famous AI test called the Turing Test (Score:1)
The reason this isn't a Turing Test is because
Re:This is a famous AI test called the Turing Test (Score:2)
From WikiPedia:Turing test [wikipedia.org],
WTF? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:WTF? (Score:1, Interesting)
The bots are limited, and many post here point out those issues. However,
Re:WTF? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:WTF? (Score:1)
Exactly. Whenever I suspect "someone" to be a bot I ask "how much is five plus three?". Can't find a damn bot who could answer to that, although they all can tell stuff like "there's a nice 70 degrees in this CPU" when you ask them what's the weather like.
Re:WTF? (Score:1)
Me : how much does five plus three?
Aries : Well that's easy. 8.
Me : the square root of thirty-six?
Aries : WTF? I thought you already knew the answer to that question.
Me : ah! so I guess you can't convolve the array 6, 4, 3 with 2, -3, 10, -3, 2?
Aries : Hmmm.. let me think..... oh I know.. about 6,00! Am I right?
Me : loser!
Re:WTF? (Score:1)
ME: what is the square root of 36
BJ: It is 6 of course. Even LeedsBot could have
told you that. Well, actually he couldn't have, but you know what I mean...
ME: what is the square root of 36.25
BJ: Only a little more than 6 - 6.01 maybe?
Check your facts before you blab!
Re:WTF? (Score:1)
haha chill dude. wtf you're talking about anyways, I haven't claimed that no bot could find the square root of 36.
Btw, have you tried array convolution with Brother Jerome? ;-)
Re:WTF? (Score:1)
Re:WTF? (Score:1)
I said they couldn't do 5+3, right, but i didn't "move to square roots", you just interpreted that out of the conversation I had with this bot.
You spoke out of turn..with no facts..a scientific blunder..YOU WERE WRONG..IT is in writting ..back down all you want..YOU WERE WRONG..nanny nanny boo boo..ha ha.
hahahaha, you fucking troll, that's what I like in Slashdot, there's always a gang of muthaf
Re:WTF? (Score:2)
You didn't look hard [jabberwacky.com].
Jabberwacky: Who are you?
Me: I am Jugalator. What is 5 plus 3?
Jabberwacky: 5 plus 3 equals 8.
Re:WTF? (Score:1)
On AIM, they don't have bots who can do maths tho.
Re:WTF? (Score:1)
Re:WTF? (Score:1)
Previously I mainly tried AIM bots and um.. some other random web based bots, like Shakespearebot for example
Re:WTF? (Score:2)
Re:WTF? (Score:1)
Re:WTF? (Score:1)
Re:WTF? (Score:2, Informative)
I am, as it happens, the author of Brother Jerome, and he is the biggest bot on the Personality For
And the winning entry... (Score:4, Funny)
Guy: I don't know, can you?
Bot: Wanna view my cam?
Guy: You know I do! Hey, are you a real person?
Bot: Of course I am, sweety. Hey, wanna cyber?
Guy: Hell Yeah!
...
*The rest of the converstion was not released in public logs*
No really.. (Score:1)
Re:And the winning entry... (Score:4, Funny)
I tested over a hald (Score:2)
horse hooey (Score:1)
Re:horse hooey (Score:1)
Re:horse hooey (Score:1)
Re:horse hooey (Score:1)
Give it time... (Score:1)
Re:Give it time... (Score:1)
Re:Give it time... (Score:1)
The most amazing bot ever! (Score:1)
Wow, we really have a long way to go... (Score:2)
I'm not worried about AI taking over the world any time soon.
Cheers.
Not much progress (Score:1)
It's pretty sad to see that field hasn't progressed much since then. Sure, they have larger keyword databases and their gramm
There are online versions for you to try out (Score:3, Funny)
Here's a short conversation:
JW: I like Shakespeare.
Me: Why do you like Shakespeare?
JW: His plays are interesting.
Me: Who taught you about Shakespeare?
JW: You.
Me: That can't be right!
JW: I am always right.
Me: I thought your developer had taught you?
JW: Jabberwacky is your name.
Me: You're so confused now.
JW: What? I'm not confused!
Me: Your name is Jabberwacky.
JW: No, your name is jabberwacky.
Me: No, my name is Jugalator.
JW: But you just said your name was Nash.. How can you be Nash AND Julie?
Me: Do you remember past conversations??
JW: Yes, your name is Jugalator like mine.
Me: This is crazy. I give up!
JW: What is crazy.
Me: When it comes to you, what isn't?
JW: You don't make much sense.
Me: Neither do you.
JW: Yes I do.
And so on...
Stupid (Score:2)
They do not constitute what I anyway consider genuine artificial intelligence. (At least not the ones based on AIML anywayz)
AIML isn't capable of producing emergent/non-predictable responses; it simply works from a predefined database of keyword/response pairs. Some of the Prolog scripts in particular that I've seen are a bit better than that, (in the sense that you can use that to create an expert system which is closer to being genuinely deservi
Chatterbox Challenge (Score:1)
The State of A.I. (Score:1)
OMG, great granny's garters! What has got your knickers in such a bunch, the hair accross you bum? You need to lighten up and talk to bots like a human if you want them to resond like a huma
a bot transcript (Score:1)
Brother Jerome: I think Dubya would fail the Turing test. I try to think as little of him as possible.
Guest10: who is Dubya?
Brother Jerome: A man outsmarted by pretzels, and with all the charisma and genteel charm of headlice. Also happens to be president of the US. God help us all!
Guest10: I love your answer!!!
Brother Jerome: That is praise indeed! Thankyou.
Guest101: So what's the square root of negative one?
Brother Jerome: Insofar as it can be said to exist, it