Computerized text generation may be getting close to passing the Turing test. (Turing, an early computer scientist, suggested that if a person couldn't tell whether they were text-chatting with a human or a computer, the computer must be intelligent.)
In response to a comment I made about special interests within government, the following comment showed up, which I think may have been computer-generated:governments differ from what is it's purpose and it's characteristics. Interests also makes every government unique. Thanks for the post by the way.
The username was the same as the URL (for a commercial site), so I'm pretty sure it was spam and not a legitimate comment. But I'm not totally sure... I did delete it, and will continue to delete similar comments. But it was spooky to be unsure whether the text I was reading was created by a human or a computer.
It seems unlikely that spammers would spend the effort to write several on-topic sentences that will probably be deleted, just to get a single mention of their URL on a blog site that doesn't let search engines register the URL link.
I think it's plausible, nowadays, that chatbots fed a few key words from my comment could generate the above text.
I got curious whether these sentences had been found by Google search from the keywords, so I googled for "governments "purpose and it's characteristics"" to see whether that phrase existed on the web. Google corrected my grammar.
I would rather suggest that giving link value to a user who has read your blog and gave intelligent comment is not going to hurt you.
May be his/her comments have added some value to your blog and let other folks to particiapte in your blog.
But if it is spam or irlevant comment, delete it urgenntly.
I am really awaiting to see what will you do with my comment.
Posted by: henry@phoenix arizona | March 02, 2010 at 02:57 AM
You're a human, and your comment actually contributes. It stays. :-)
I really didn't think the other comment contributed anything. It used the right keywords, but I don't think any reader would have learned anything useful from it.
Chris
Posted by: Chris Phoenix, CRN | March 02, 2010 at 12:20 PM
You're a human, and your comment actually contributes. It stays. :-)
Posted by: viagra online | March 04, 2010 at 11:55 AM
The point of a comment is to add to the conversation or as an addendum to the article, and if it's not a real person, what's the point? I agree with Henry that unless a comment is completely irrelevant, it should be approved if there is evidence that 1) the person read the article 2) the commenter is a real person and NOT a computer.
Posted by: Big Al Stainless Steel Water Bottles | March 09, 2010 at 08:34 PM
A couple of days ago, someone made a comment on another post that was somewhat relevant but with a blatantly commercial name/URL - like yours, Big Al.
I "unpublished" the comment, and wrote to the person, saying "What is your interest in nanotech?"
If I had gotten a response, I would have re-published the comment. I did not get a response. I conclude that that person was a spammer, plain and simple.
If someone has a blatantly commercial name/URL, and their comment does not substantially advance the discussion, from now on I will unpublish it. They would have to notice, write and complain to get it back. With a blatantly commercial name, the burden of proof and effort is on you to prove you are not a spammer. If you don't like that, don't use my blog for advertising.
Time to get back to work - I'm closing comments on this post, and I will not welcome this discussion continuing on other posts.
Chris
Posted by: Chris Phoenix, CRN | March 10, 2010 at 01:48 AM