Children often answer questions nonsensically. They are prompted over years to be serious and answer questions correctly.
I am not sure that's the same.
Children answer nonsensically to normal questions, but if you ask a nonsensical question they are more likely to go "uh?" than to answer with logically built follow-up nonsense.
What would the ethics be of using children in Turing tests? If you asked a human child to answer Turing test questions, would the judges think of them as a computer?
Yes, they are trained over time, just as this model has been.
Humans have much more context at their perusal than a simple prompt.
That depends on context. Nobody would answer "this question makes no sense" in an exam, instead most people assume they lack knowledge of what's being referenced. Even humans have to expect the possibility of nonsensical questions
"None of the above" is sometimes the right answer on exam questions.
So think of this as adding a "none of the above" option.
Humans don’t need AC power to operate either, but presumably these aren’t the kind of differences we’re interested in.
It depends whether you think the other party would prefer for you to play along or call them out on their BS. Between friends we generally prefer the latter.
True. Maybe the human corollary to this is sarcasm. Lots of people fail to pick up on sarcasm in online discussion, hence the /s at the end of a post. And for that matter, natural language parsers really struggle at extracting real meaning from sarcastic texts too.