BRYAN CAPLAN
May 7, 2013
Keynesian Bets: What's Out There
May 6, 2013
Keynesian Bets Bleg
May 6, 2013
The Pyramid of Macroeconomic Insight and Virtue
May 2, 2013
A Natalist Provision
May 1, 2013
I Was a Teenage Misanthrope
DAVID HENDERSON
May 5, 2013
John Thacker on Vaccinations and the Sequester
May 3, 2013
Chef Rudy's Virtues Project
May 2, 2013
My take on Reinhart and Rogoff
May 1, 2013
Medicare Kills a Program
SHARE
Relevant... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Weakness_of_Turing_test_1.svg
Can/should this set include nonhuman organisms (say chimpanzees or dolphins?)
My question is whether these "artificial intelligences" are actually intelligent or more like the utterly unintelligent things we call "artificial intelligence" today.
I answered the monkey presuming the former.
Intelins
Sentents - sentient entities
Voters
On the original test at Survey Monkey, it allowed a write-in answer to which I responded "Thinkers". But a write-in option didn't appear on the QuickSurveys version.
My original speculation was that both Brian and Robin had bet that a particular name would be more popular than the rest.
It now occurs to me that one of them may be betting against any sort of consensus.
"Cogitants" is the best I can think of. It's not a pure neologism, I think; it's sort of crypto-English already, since "cogitate" means think and the suffix "-ant" can mean "one who," as in attendant, defendant, assistant. Alternatively, "cogitator" or-- this is more of a pure neologism-- "cogitor." A strange alternative that I like is "noet," rhymes with poet, akin to words like "noetic" (having to do with the mind/spirit) and "noosphere," the realm of ideas. "All cogitors, human and mechanical, are able to use systems of arbitrary symbols to *refer* to, or be mapped onto, real entites..." Hmm, interesting.
Intellentity = intelligent entity
I think he'd get a better quality overall response if the options were displayed in a random order. I refreshed it a couple times and it didn't look like that was the case.
Taxpayers
Keep it simple. Creatures possessing the traits are "Ons", those lacking are "Nons"
To echo Nathan, I think the lack of randomization is a big problem. I voted for "agents." I can't entirely ascribe my decision to its placement at the top of the list; I genuinely believe I like it most. But I can't be sure.
How about Hal? Human/Alternate ... something something. "l" could stand for "lingual", which might an adjective which can be nouned.
Why not follow the Buddhists and just call them sentient beings? That way you can also include the Raksas, Gandharvas, Devas, Yaksas, and the hungry ghosts.
I wonder which group of mythical beings artificial intelligence will most closely resemble. Hopefully not the Raksas or hungry ghosts.
There is already a word for this: sophont