Human Intelligence Versus AI Machine

The original question “Can machine think?” proposed by Alan M. Turing in 1950 in papers entitled “Computing Machinery and Intelligence, Mind 49: 433-460.” He considered first how we can understand the words “machine” and “think”. To avoid falling into absurd definitions, Turing transformed the original question into an “imitation game,” in which three players, A, B, and C, participate. Player C is the interrogator and sits on the other side of a wall. Player C must identify a man and a woman, who could be A or B, in separate rooms. At some point, one of them could be replaced by a machine. The new quotation is: “What will happen when a machine takes the part of A in this game?” “Will the interrogator decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman?” More than 75 years after Turing posed this crucial question, I believe we still lack a definitive answer, even though we now consider machines to be intelligent. But do they truly think? If something doesn’t think, how can it be intelligent? This article proposes delving seriously into the correct interpretation of artificial intelligence and to promote discussion among the scientific community of artificial intelligence developers and intelligent people from all disciplines, across all sectors of society and governments, in order to find the wisest conceptualization of our most valuable current tool: AI. The aim is not to discredit AI, but rather to understand the true context on which it can be based. This will help us avoid the risk of an irreversible, harmful and chaotic evolution of “thinking machines” that could turn against humanity. If we need to stop, then we must stop. If we’re on the wrong track, it’s advisable to rethink, redesign, and improve our AI. From now on, AI must be an ally in humanity’s progress toward a Type 1 civilization, and it must be well designed and built.