Chatgpt Passed the Turing Test. Now What?

Posted4 months agoActive4 months ago

Brajeshwar

5 points

5 comments

popsci.comTechstory

calmmixed

Debate

20/100

AITuring TestChatgpt

Key topics

Turing Test

Chatgpt

Article discusses ChatGPT passing the Turing Test and its implications, with community showing mixed reactions.

Snapshot generated from the HN discussion

Discussion Activity

Light discussion

First comment

Peak period

0-1h

Avg / period

2.5

Key moments

01Story posted
Sep 16, 2025 at 12:08 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01
02First comment
Sep 16, 2025 at 12:11 PM EDT
3m after posting
Step 02
03Peak activity
4 comments in 0-1h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03
04Latest activity
Sep 16, 2025 at 1:26 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04

Generating AI Summary...

Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns

Discussion (5 comments)

Showing 5 comments

allears

4 months ago

1 reply

Pop science indeed. Nothing new here. The Turing Test was the product of a much earlier era. Our machines today can easily fake a conversation, but there's been little progress in defining what intelligence is, let alone consciousness. Whatever they are, it's clear that LLMs don't have them, and aren't on track to produce them.

spindump8930

4 months ago

For many of us a better Turing test is contextual to a topic we CARE about. Lots of LLMs sound better than a randomly sampled human on a topic I don't know too much about (e.g. opinions on new movies). They're decent on engineering topics I only vaguely know about, but still below the bar (though getting better!) on topics I really care about.

NitpickLawyer

4 months ago

Now the turing test isn't a good test. So the goalposts keep on moving. "AI is anything that hasn't been done yet" (quote from 1980s).

tjr

4 months ago

Jones and his team performed this experiment with four LLMs. ChatGPT 4.5 was by far the most successful: 73% of participants identified it as the real human. Another model that goes by the unwieldy name LLaMa-3.1-405B was identified as human 56% of the time. (The other two models—ELIZA and GPT-4o—achieved 23% and 21% success rates, respectively, and will not be spoken of again.)

By ELIZA, are they referring to the classic ELIZA? I am not aware of anything new and current with the same name?

If the old ELIZA succeeded 23% of the time, in the context of the other numbers ... that seems ... odd.

beardyw

4 months ago

> The AI fooled 73% of people into thinking it was human, raising new questions about machine intelligence.

We all know it just raises questions about the Turing test.

View full discussion on Hacker News

ID: 45264148Type: storyLast synced: 11/17/2025, 2:07:52 PM

Want the full context?

Jump to the original sources

Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.

Open link View on HN