> Turing proposed that a human evaluator would judge natural language conversations between a human and a machine designed to generate human-like responses. The evaluator would be aware that one of the two partners in conversation was a machine, and all participants would be separated from one another. The conversation would be limited to a text-only channel, such as a computer keyboard and screen, so the result would not depend on the machine's ability to render words as speech.

I don't see agency mentioned or implied anywhere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test

What definition or setup are you taking it from?

> LLMs have already beaten the Turing test.

I am wondering where this happened? In some limited scope? Because if you plug LLM into some call center role for example, it will fall apart pretty quickly.

This is only true for some situations. In some test conditions it has not been passed. I can't remember the exact name, but there used to be a competition where PhD level participants blindly chat for several minutes with each other and are incentivized to discover who is a bot and who is a human. I can't remember if they still run it, but that bar has never been passed from what I recall.