News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by libeclipse on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @07:29AM (#14444488)
I doubt this is more accurate than humans are, or is that possible?

Wouldn't an AI that can be a judge in a Turing test be able to pass the Turing test?

Or is this just testing how "real" the voice sounds?

Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by nf05papsjfVbc on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @08:21AM (#14444718)
Being able to classify things and being able to pretend to be one of those things are not the same.

An oversimplified example: Being able to recognise someone and being able to draw a picture of their face (or pretending to be them) are not the same.

Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by gargravarr on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @08:42AM (#14444852)
> Wouldn't an AI that can be a judge in a Turing test be able to pass the Turing test?

I changed my mind. I don't want the Red Pill anymore. Ignorance is bliss.

Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by djanatan on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @02:06PM (#14447198)
This is how I feel too. This is getting out of control.
Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by beachbum8029 on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @05:08PM (#14448557)
The best part is that we haven't yet seen a half of a percent of what AI's are capable of. Strap on your seat-belts because Kansas is going bye-bye.
Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by philh on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @11:10AM (#14445893)
> Wouldn't an AI that can be a judge in a Turing test be able to pass the Turing test?

Not automatically, unless it had unlimited time and/or compute power. Verifying a potential solution seems to be much easier than generating a valid one. See also: P versus NP.

Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by Eridrus on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @10:09AM (#14445457)
Humans are not perfect sensors; there are changes we are sensitive to and changes we are not.

As a trivial example, if a speech synthesis system was emitting high frequency static, we wouldn't hear it at all, but would be trivial to detect with a microphone.

I fully expect software to be better at this than we are if there ever turns out to be a need for this sort of thing.

Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by netsharc on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @08:23AM (#14444732)
Presumably text-to-speech systems have signatures. For example how many milliseconds they need to pronounce each syllable of a particular word, say "watermelon". If the timings match for a whole sentence, this machine would probably be able to recognize that... an easy defeat would be a TTS engine that adds random milliseconds to each syllable.
Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by gargravarr on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @08:49AM (#14444901)
Thus begins the first TTS arms race.

Yes, this is what will define 2017.

Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by wongarsu on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @10:05AM (#14445430)
Well, deciding whether an array of arbitrary data is sorted can be done trivially in O(n). Sorting an unsorted array requires a much more complicated algorithm that runs in O(n log n) (or worse).

I imagine computers would be able to do quite well at judging a turing test heuristically. Passing it is quite a different matter.

Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by balls187 on Tuesday May 30, 2017 @01:59PM (#14447157)
> Sorting an unsorted array requires a much more complicated algorithm

That is taught in every CS algorithm course.

Re:Anti-AI AI: A device that notifies the wearer when a synt... by wongarsu on Wednesday June 07, 2017 @07:17PM (#14510635)
Yes, every CS course teaches you multiple algorithms for sorting data. Most of them require extensive explanation to understand, and are very hard to come up with on your own.