Were 33% of participants stoned out of their minds or just morons?
a bit blunt but yeah. It's more the judges failing that the "AI" passing.
The others who failed big time, are the media (what a surprise
‘I believe that in about fifty years’ time [from 1950] it will be possible, to programme computers, with a storage capacity of about 10^9 [i.e. a billion bits, corrected from link], to make them play the imitation game so well that an average interrogator will not have more than 70 per cent chance of making the right identification after five minutes of questioning’
I took this from http://www.loebner.net/Prizef/TuringArticle.html
Resumed, Turing believed that by 2000 we'd have a 128 MB imitate a human well enough to fool 70% of the people for 5 minutes.
He doesn't say that this means it can be called intelligent nor that this can reasonably be expected of an intelligent machine.
After all, it's a pretty minimal thing, the requisites set by AT. The test is a measure of the capability of a computer and of an average person – but it is not, any sort of reliable measure of artificial intelligence.
On the other hand, if the chatbot can fool, at least half when interacting with them for days, then I’d be willing to give it's “intelligent” status a chance.
bah, tl;dr the link Police of Mind gave explains it better. Just, a big no.