The "Turing test" per se is not a good test. (As it increasingly appears. Unless one lives in the "outside" state the writer of the submitted page theorizes)

I've come to strongly dislike the idea of the "Turing Test" and agree that it's not a good test. IMO, all it's really doing is testing our ability to create a computer than can lie effectively. That does not seem to me to be the most useful thing to focus on.

> than can lie effectively

Sure. And of course, do not forget that the testers are known for a disposition of potentially being fooled - and that we are still, collectively, societally, civilization-wise, generally unable to do proper selection.

Good thing we still have Voigt-Kampf in our back pockets.

«Would the tortoise be you, Mr. Holden? I approve of that.»

Which is not in the script, unfortunately. Had not to be, because it was just a construed example of a successful Turing test. If not for the turn of events that a human may be made upset by the assumptions, but the mockery test was stated as intended to «provoke an emotional response», and juicily the invented machine, having failed all "common sense" reactions, responds exactly like a proper human to that.