cleverbot

[Ethanadams]

if you don't know what cleverbot is it is a amazing chat ai that you can talk to (duh) if you don't understand here is a chat i had with it https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bxs9CfbO1DHEflY0dXBfVHg4aFM1WlB1ODVTUEw0WE9uWnJLVG4ta0lNckFPZ3gwcG5zSVk&usp=sharing that was with cleverbot probably the smartest out of the three the other two are eviebot and boibot. here is the link to the web page http://cleverbot.com

they also have a new thing called cleverscript which you can make your own bot http://cleverscript.com

try it out for yourself its really fun but the bots might be a little stupid at times and a bit repetitive.

[Thomassino]

It should really be called uncleverbot... some of its answers are... well... meh

One hint: Do not call it a robot, you will ignite an discussion which would not be very pleasant

[Bill Phil]

If it was more coherent and remembered what it said, maybe it'd be clever...

[LordFerret]

If it was more coherent and remembered what it said, maybe it'd be clever...

Agreed.

Ask it to divide 22 by 7 ... or ... 'How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?'

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Yeah, that's my problem with cleverbot, I can understand if the thing doesn't understand the conversation or get something wrong, but If the topic was set by the bot it self... then it should remember what he was talking about.

[RainDreamer]

I wonder if one day the bot becomes clever enough to just route users to chat with each other, with them thinking they are just chatting with a robot.

Is that like...a reverse Turing test?

[WinkAllKerb'']

If i remind well everquest PNJ were around the first we were able to begin to chat with like what 15 year ago ; ) things evolved fast and will continue to evolve with data backcrossing and multithreading.

[LordFerret]

I have news for you; There was software which did this back in the late 1970's. It didn't talk, it typed/printed on the terminal. It would ask you questions, and then based on your answers, interact with you much like a psychiatrist would. I don't recall the name of the software project.

Then there was BARD; BARD was a poetry writing program. You would give it 'ideas' (topic words, etc), and it would write poetry themed around your input.

[WinkAllKerb'']

was meaning public large scale related server, yup yup LF : ) wich was kinda significative in the data aquisition rate and self evolve correcting models algorythms ; )

edit: i m not 100% sure but from what i can remember and know verant interactive and sony introduced thoose kind of thing large scale to the public mostly within the first(s). /area51palm xDr somehow

Edited September 6, 2015 by WinkAllKerb''

[Ethanadams]

some times it is really smart and creative but i think one of the major problems is that it has user that are not as smart as others causing it to be dummer and less fun like my conversation for example but i do like its suggestion to invade alaska

[UnionPacific1983WP]

Watch jacksepticeye's CB videos.........

[Yukon0009]

Apparantely Cleverbot plays TF2..

[lajoswinkler]

Here's one older, I think.

[Randazzo]

Cleverbot gets less intelligent and makes less sense the longer it interacts with people on the internet. It used to be somewhat entertaining as it could hold a mostly sensible conversation for a little while.

A lot of this comes from the people it interacts with intentionally being idiots trying to confuse a machine that can't be confused, then regurgitates that nonsense later, having learned it to be an acceptable form of communication.

[Red Iron Crown]

A lot of this comes from the people it interacts with intentionally being idiots trying to confuse a machine that can't be confused, then regurgitates that nonsense later, having learned it to be an acceptable form of communication.

People are susceptible to this phenomenon, too, in my experience.

[LordFerret]

Agreed ^

[RainDreamer]

It is the reason why people need licenses to teach kids.

[Hcube]

I always end up arguing with this smartS. It often gets pretty impolite and annoying... And every time i try it i leave after a minute because i can't stand it !

[LordFerret]

It is the reason why people need licenses to teach kids.

That doesn't excuse what's going on in colleges across the US. The agenda and revisionist history a large majority of them teach, I wonder how they got their certifications in the first place. It's all a very good reason to carefully select a 'non-polluted' college/university when looking to begin building ones future.

Wow, I managed to get that out without being overtly political.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

This is great:

CB: I do not like horror movies.

ME: Only robots don't like horror movies.

CB: Yeah horror movies are the best.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, this is good:

(I'm first)

I'm not talking to you.

Yes, you are.

Why?

Because I said so.

I didn't, why do you have such a superiority complex?

To go along with your strange nature.

[LordFerret]

That's ok. I tried asking it something in Russian, and it answered me (unintelligibly) in French.

[Flymetothemun]

I have news for you; There was software which did this back in the late 1970's. It didn't talk, it typed/printed on the terminal. It would ask you questions, and then based on your answers, interact with you much like a psychiatrist would. I don't recall the name of the software project.

Then there was BARD; BARD was a poetry writing program. You would give it 'ideas' (topic words, etc), and it would write poetry themed around your input.

Was the name eliza? I recall seeing a similar thing on a Telnet BBS a few years ago and that was the name of the program.

[adsii1970]

That doesn't excuse what's going on in colleges across the US. The agenda and revisionist history a large majority of them teach, I wonder how they got their certifications in the first place. It's all a very good reason to carefully select a 'non-polluted' college/university when looking to begin building ones future.

Wow, I managed to get that out without being overtly political.

If I may take my shot without being overly political here - and I teach college...

Many of my younger colleagues are ideologues. They hold to a certain world view and instead of it being based on fact alone, it is based off emotions. In turn, the emotions are used to "back up" the facts. History is part art and part science and should never include emotion when it is evaluated. Yes, it is hard to walk that balance beam, because many of the topics I cover in my classes can play on human emotion. I'd really be on Mount Seleya to even attempt to say that historical fact does not impact human emotion.

One of the problems I had in graduate school is I challenged methodology and historiography used to determine what was "accepted" interpretation of historical fact. I do not believe emotion has a role in the interpretation of historical events because once we allow emotion to determine what is taught, then the goal always becomes to teach in a manner that does one of two things - either tears down or builds up. Both can be done with false narratives and the results are always devastating. The Communists, immediately after the Bolshevik Revolution set out to rewrite Russian history, the Chinese Communists did the same thing. The French rewrote their history during the French Revolution and the results were equally disastrous - once you rewrite your national history to support a certain world view, the stage is set for each new political faction to rewrite history according to its own interpretation. Soon, the meaning of every aspect of the civilization is no longer an absolute, but simply an unconnected and transitory event with no real meaning. Even today, France is still suffering the results of rewriting its history.

Right now in the United States, there is a new movement within academia to see everything through a certain political slant with the outcome being the silencing of ALL discussion and the adoption of a common world view. The problem is as human beings, we can all eat the same cake and each one of us will have a different opinion. We all can see the same event and interpret it differently. We can take any event in human history and interpret it a variety of ways - and each way would be valid unless the interpretation is based on emotional appeal. Once emotional appeal is brought in, academia loses all credibility. No longer is the college campus the bastion of liberty and free thought.

[LordFerret]

Was the name eliza? I recall seeing a similar thing on a Telnet BBS a few years ago and that was the name of the program.

!!! I do believe that could be it. Reading this about it, I'd say yes. The time-frame is certainly right.

- - - Updated - - -

If I may take my shot without being overly political here - and I teach college...

Many of my younger colleagues are ideologues. They hold to a certain world view and instead of it being based on fact alone, it is based off emotions. In turn, the emotions are used to "back up" the facts. History is part art and part science and should never include emotion when it is evaluated. Yes, it is hard to walk that balance beam, because many of the topics I cover in my classes can play on human emotion. I'd really be on Mount Seleya to even attempt to say that historical fact does not impact human emotion.

One of the problems I had in graduate school is I challenged methodology and historiography used to determine what was "accepted" interpretation of historical fact. I do not believe emotion has a role in the interpretation of historical events because once we allow emotion to determine what is taught, then the goal always becomes to teach in a manner that does one of two things - either tears down or builds up. Both can be done with false narratives and the results are always devastating. The Communists, immediately after the Bolshevik Revolution set out to rewrite Russian history, the Chinese Communists did the same thing. The French rewrote their history during the French Revolution and the results were equally disastrous - once you rewrite your national history to support a certain world view, the stage is set for each new political faction to rewrite history according to its own interpretation. Soon, the meaning of every aspect of the civilization is no longer an absolute, but simply an unconnected and transitory event with no real meaning. Even today, France is still suffering the results of rewriting its history.

Right now in the United States, there is a new movement within academia to see everything through a certain political slant with the outcome being the silencing of ALL discussion and the adoption of a common world view. The problem is as human beings, we can all eat the same cake and each one of us will have a different opinion. We all can see the same event and interpret it differently. We can take any event in human history and interpret it a variety of ways - and each way would be valid unless the interpretation is based on emotional appeal. Once emotional appeal is brought in, academia loses all credibility. No longer is the college campus the bastion of liberty and free thought.

I could definitely sit through one of your courses/classes!

I've made comment in these forums before with regard to such, over Arthur Jensen's "Bias In Mental Testing". A hotly contested piece of work, even today... especially today, although now it's been submerged into obscurity by the so-called 'intelligentsia'. I'll always note to potential readers, that Jensen set out to prove bias in mental testing. Lo and behold his surprise when all his results showed naught. To this day, several books have been written by "authority", such as Gould's, which refute all of Jensen's conclusions. ALL of these books are written and based on "feelings", "hopes", and "desires" ... with absolutely no empirical data to back up the claims. As a matter of fact, no authority, political nor academic have attempted to reproduce Jensen's results ... because they know the truth, and that it's futile ..... they've even stopped collecting fresh data (IQ tests).

[adsii1970]

I could definitely sit through one of your courses/classes!

I've made comment in these forums before with regard to such, over Arthur Jensen's "Bias In Mental Testing". A hotly contested piece of work, even today... especially today, although now it's been submerged into obscurity by the so-called 'intelligentsia'. I'll always note to potential readers, that Jensen set out to prove bias in mental testing. Lo and behold his surprise when all his results showed naught. To this day, several books have been written by "authority", such as Gould's, which refute all of Jensen's conclusions. ALL of these books are written and based on "feelings", "hopes", and "desires" ... with absolutely no empirical data to back up the claims. As a matter of fact, no authority, political nor academic have attempted to reproduce Jensen's results ... because they know the truth, and that it's futile ..... they've even stopped collecting fresh data (IQ tests).

It is happening more and more in a variety of subject - everything from psychology, comparative religion courses, climatology, history, sociology, and even space exploration. Once a "consensus" has developed that matches the social trends in society, real empirical data collection, as you (LordFerret) have correctly stated, the collection of data and the debate stops. One thing that made Western civilization great was the Enlightenment; what we are witnessing now is the Second Great Dark Ages (as I have named it) where real intellectual debate, study, research, and experimentation is beginning to come to an end.