You know, I think one of the listservs in which I participate, for the moment, is being subject to a Turing test. A new poster to the list in recent weeks is providing over 50% of the content (some of which appears to promote a software company). He is taking a position on knowledge management which assumes that unless something is defined it has no value, that all knowledge resides in the brain and the only thing we can do is to manage information. Add a love for process, cost reduction at any cost, and we have a view of KM that most of us thought had died out years ago.
However I now have a new theory, the anal, highly structured nature of the response. The repetition of unsustainable points and the use of standard phrases from management text books; all of these indicate that we are not dealing with a human being, but with a computer that is analyzing the text and using a library to produce stock answers. Its the only explanation that works. The moderators rejected my current response (well its under negotiation) but I do hope it is a computer, the thought that there really is a human behind this worries me.
Comments (6)
If you have guessed correctly, then it has failed. But if you are wrong, then the difference between a human and a bot is sufficiently indistinguishable for some hypothetical automated entity with which the unfortunate human is being compared, to have passed the test. Either way, the prize must be soon within grasp.
Posted by Andy Roberts![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.cognitive-edge.com/blogs/dave/nav-commenters.gif)
|
April 23, 2007 12:19 PM
Posted on April 23, 2007 12:19
I think we all fail the Turing Test from time to time.
Posted by Matt Moore | April 23, 2007 12:35 PM
Posted on April 23, 2007 12:35
Quote: "The moderators rejected my current response (well its under negotiation) but I do hope it is a computer".
Misunderstanding on purpose: the moderator is a computer? Then you will have problems to get your original thoughts approved. You'd better recycle standard phrases that make sense - since they have been repeated so often already that they became common knowledge, at least common knowledge in AI knowledge repositories which are used to filter spam and to moderate comments.
Posted by christianhauck![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.cognitive-edge.com/blogs/dave/nav-commenters.gif)
|
April 23, 2007 9:48 PM
Posted on April 23, 2007 21:48
Maybe you've got this the wrong way round, Dave, and this is a human trying to work like a computer?
Posted by Patrick Lambe![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.cognitive-edge.com/blogs/dave/nav-commenters.gif)
|
April 24, 2007 12:21 PM
Posted on April 24, 2007 12:21
OK, I am not a computer. I think there is a valid place for knowledge management discussions, and yet I still feel that knowledge is ultimately something which is in the brain (or some other part of the body--sic piano playing knowledge). Knowledge Management tools are special repositories for storing, retrieving and sharing knowledge objects which can induce learning and promote aquisition of knowledge. One of those knowledge management tools which works for me is General Knowledge Base Please don't penalize me for liking this software.
Posted by Vincent | April 25, 2007 3:32 PM
Posted on April 25, 2007 15:32
I don't think I would ever penalise people for using information management, only for claiming that all KM is only IM (as was the case with my protagonist, and I love Patrick's comment by the way). I'd also agree that knowledge is in general a human act, but we can store knowledge in our environment and social processes (as well as the more obvious use of tools). The software package you use is cheap enough that it could be used as an experiment. However reading the material I would have thought social computing tools could do the job better.
Posted by Dave Snowden![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.cognitive-edge.com/blogs/dave/nav-commenters.gif)
|
April 25, 2007 3:38 PM
Posted on April 25, 2007 15:38