Taking the fifth amendment in Turing’s imitation game by Kevin Warwick and Huma Shahb.
Abstract:
In this paper, we look at a specific issue with practical Turing tests, namely the right of the machine to remain silent during interrogation. In particular, we consider the possibility of a machine passing the Turing test simply by not saying anything. We include a number of transcripts from practical Turing tests in which silence has actually occurred on the part of a hidden entity. Each of the transcripts considered here resulted in a judge being unable to make the ‘right identification’, i.e., they could not say for certain which hidden entity was the machine.
A delightful read about something never seen in media interviews: silence of the person being interviewed.
Of the interviews I watch, which is thankfully a small number, most people would seem more intelligent by being silent more often.
I take author’s results as a mark in favor of Fish’s interpretative communities because “interpretation” of silence falls squarely on the shoulders of the questioner.
If you don’t know the name Kevin Warwick, you should.
As of today, footnote 1 correctly points to the Fifth Amendment text at Cornell but mis-quotes it. In relevant part the Fifth Amendment reads, “…nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself….”