With an different approach by analyzing huge data bases

With only a very short and simple script, it ménage to mislead
many people, encouraging them to talk more and reflecting their own questions
back at them. Another script was made named  “Harry” who took the opposite approach by imitating
a paranoid schizophrenic  who caped
steering the conversation back to his own pre-programmed obsessions. Their success
in fooling people highlighted one weakness of the test. Humans regularly attribute
intelligence to a whole range of things that are not actually intelligent. Nerveless,  annual competition has made the test more
formal  with judges knowing  a head of time that some of their conversation’s
partners are machines , but while the quality has proved  that many chatbot programmers have used similar
strategies to Eliza and Harry. 1997’s winner of competition “Catherine”, could
carry amazingly focused in an intelligence conversation, but mostly if the
judge wanted to talk about Bill Clinton and the more recent winner  Jugine Goustman  was giving the persona the 13 years old Ukrainian
boy, so judges interpreted its non sequesters  an aquart grammar as language and cultural
barriers. Meanwhile, others programs like “cleverbot” have taken an different
approach by  analyzing huge data bases
and real conversation to determine the best responses. Some machines also
stored memory of last conversations in order to improve over time. But, while
cleverbot’s individual responses can sound like human, it is lack of consistent
personality and inability to deal with brand new topics which  have been  predicting  that today’s computers would be able to pilot
space craft, perform delicate surgeries and solve the most difficult math
equations but, still struggle with the most basic small talk?! Human language
turns out to be an amazing complex phenomenon that can not be captured even by
the largest dictionary. Chatbots can be befoul 
by simple exclamatory like:”Umm..” or  complex 
questions with no correct answer. In a simple conversation, composite
sentences like:” I took the juice out of the fridge and gave it to them , but
forgot to check the date”,  requires  a wealth of underlining knowledge and
intuition. It turns out that simulating a human conversation takes more than
just an increasing memory and processes. As we get closer to Turing’s goal, we
may have to deal with all these big questions about consciousness.