It didn’t take long, however, for Turing’s headaches to begin. The BabyQ bot drew the ire of Chinese officials by speaking ill of the Communist Party. In the exchange seen in the screenshot above, one user commented, “Long Live the Communist Party!” In response, BabyQ asked the user, “Do you think that such a corrupt and incompetent political regime can live forever?”
Despite all efforts during almost half a century, most chatbots are still easily uncovered, but over the next decades they will definitely get smarter and finally we will distinguish human beings by them giving us silly answers as opposed to the much smarter chatbots. All of this will really start accelerating as soon as one single chatbot is smarter than one single human being. They will then be able to learn from each other, instead of learning from human beings, their knowledge will explode and they will be able to design even better learning mechanisms. In the long run, we will learn language from chatbots instead of the other way around.
NBC Politics Bot allowed users to engage with the conversational agent via Facebook to identify breaking news topics that would be of interest to the network’s various audience demographics. After beginning the initial interaction, the bot provided users with customized news results (prioritizing video content, a move that undoubtedly made Facebook happy) based on their preferences.
Unfortunately, my mom can’t really engage in meaningful conversations anymore, but many people suffering with dementia retain much of their conversational abilities as their illness progresses. However, the shame and frustration that many dementia sufferers experience often make routine, everyday talks with even close family members challenging. That’s why Russian technology company Endurance developed its companion chatbot.

Please check out our main directory with 1376 live chat bot examples (an overview as maintained by developers themselves), our vendor listing with 256 chat bot companies and chat bot news section with already more than 370 articles! Our research tab contains lots of papers on chat bots, 1,166 journals on chat bots and 390 books on chat bots. This research section also shows which universities are active in the chat bot field, indicates which publishers are publishing journals on humanlike conversational AI and informs about academic events on chat bots. Also, check out our dedicated tab for awards, contest and games related to the chat bot field, various forums like our AI forum by chat bot enthusiasts and add any chat bot as created by yourself and your colleagues to our chat bot directory. Please do not forget to register to join us in these exciting times.
The word bot, in Internet sense, is a short form of robot and originates from XX century. The modern use of the word bot has curious affinities with earlier uses, e.g. “parasitical worm or maggot” (1520s), of unknown origin; and Australian-New Zealand slang “worthless, troublesome person” (World War I -era). The method of minting new slang by clipping the heads off respectable words does not seem to be old or widespread in English. Examples: za from pizza, zels from pretzels, rents from parents, are American English student or teen slang and seem to date back no further than late 1960s.[4]

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:
×