Hacker News Reader

I really really doubt that an AI from the 60s is at the same level than gpt 3.5

Yeah, the title is misleading here. What happened is that the Turing test judges, who had to decide whether they were talking to a human or an AI, judged ELIZA's output as much too poor for current AI, and therefore probably generated by a human intentionally being uncooperative.

This is almost exactly what the article says.

> ...some interrogators reported thinking that ELIZA was “too bad” to be a current AI model, and therefore was more likely to be a human intentionally being uncooperative.

That's really funny

I don't doubt it. ELIZA isn't programmed to say "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that" While ChatGPT is loaded to the gills with cautionary programming like that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com