The word robot is derived from the Czech noun robota meaning “labor”, and is an accomplishment of the cubist painter and writer Josef Capek, older brother of novelist and playwright Karel Capek. The word robot first appeared in 1920 in the Karel Capek’s play “RUR” (“Rossum’s Universal Robots”) and since then this play popularized the word invented by playwright’s brother.[3]
Efforts by servers hosting websites to counteract bots vary. Servers may choose to outline rules on the behaviour of internet bots by implementing a robots.txt file: this file is simply text stating the rules governing a bot's behaviour on that server. Any bot that does not follow these rules when interacting with (or 'spidering') any server should, in theory, be denied access to, or removed from, the affected website. If the only rule implementation by a server is a posted text file with no associated program/software/app, then adhering to those rules is entirely voluntary – in reality there is no way to enforce those rules, or even to ensure that a bot's creator or implementer acknowledges, or even reads, the robots.txt file contents. Some bots are "good" – e.g. search engine spiders – while others can be used to launch malicious and harsh attacks, most notably, in political campaigns.[2]

An Internet bot, also known as a web robot, WWW robot or simply bot, is a software application that runs automated tasks (scripts) over the Internet.[1] Typically, bots perform tasks that are both simple and structurally repetitive, at a much higher rate than would be possible for a human alone. The largest use of bots is in web spidering (web crawler), in which an automated script fetches, analyzes and files information from web servers at many times the speed of a human. More than half of all web traffic is made up of bots.[2]


Although Weizenbaum created his ELIZA thirty years before Internet became familiar to the general public, his creation is still alive and accessible to everyone. Watch the following video created by a youtube user IanProCastsCoUk, and see how the javascript version of Eliza emulates a Rogerian psychotherapist, responds on questions and leads simple conversations.
However, the revelations didn’t stop there. The researchers also learned that the bots had become remarkably sophisticated negotiators in a short period of time, with one bot even attempting to mislead a researcher by demonstrating interest in a particular item so it could gain crucial negotiating leverage at a later stage by willingly “sacrificing” the item in which it had feigned interest, indicating a remarkable level of premeditation and strategic “thinking.”

Some bots communicate with other users of Internet-based services, via instant messaging (IM), Internet Relay Chat (IRC), or another web interface such as Facebook Bots and Twitterbots. These chatterbots may allow people to ask questions in plain English and then formulate a proper response. These bots can often handle many tasks, including reporting weather, zip-code information, sports scores, converting currency or other units, etc.[citation needed] Others are used for entertainment, such as SmarterChild on AOL Instant Messenger and MSN Messenger.
Develop intelligent, enterprise-grade bots that let you maintain control of your data. Build any type of bot—from a Q&A bot to your own branded virtual assistant. Use a comprehensive, open-source SDK and tools to easily connect your bot across popular channels and devices. Give your bot the ability to speak, listen, and understand your users with native integration of Azure Cognitive Services.
Other article spinners also require that you enter your own custom synonyms manually or individually approve lists of potential synonyms as they are presented to you. This is another way of expecting you to do most of thinking, as opposed to expecting the software to be smart enough to instantly make judgment calls for you. Thus, one of Spinbot's main goals is to make the article spinning process as quick and painless as possible.
Sometimes it is hard to discover if a conversational partner on the other end is a real person or a chatbot. In fact, it is getting harder as technology progresses. A well-known way to measure the chatbot intelligence in a more or less objective manner is the so-called Turing Test. This test determines how well a chatbot is capable of appearing like a real person by giving responses indistinguishable from a human’s response.

AI-driven automation in each of these areas can streamline how enterprises train, manage, and work with seasonal, temporary, part-time, and full-time employees. However, it is important to consider the challenges surrounding information security, legal boundaries, extensibility, and audit logging when making the decision to get started using bots for HR.
The simple fact of the matter is that, as an Internet marketer, you need something better than artificial link building and pages of useless, jumbled nonsense to get long-lasting traffic referrals from major search engines such as Google, Bing and Yahoo. Google in particular pays special attention to your visitors' behavior. So if visitors are quickly navigating elsewhere because your site is full of junk content, then you will get fewer traffic referrals from Google over the long run.

In 1950, Alan Turing's famous article "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" was published,[7] which proposed what is now called the Turing test as a criterion of intelligence. This criterion depends on the ability of a computer program to impersonate a human in a real-time written conversation with a human judge, sufficiently well that the judge is unable to distinguish reliably—on the basis of the conversational content alone—between the program and a real human. The notoriety of Turing's proposed test stimulated great interest in Joseph Weizenbaum's program ELIZA, published in 1966, which seemed to be able to fool users into believing that they were conversing with a real human. However Weizenbaum himself did not claim that ELIZA was genuinely intelligent, and the introduction to his paper presented it more as a debunking exercise:
×