"Ordinary intelligence. If you find a way to make Wikipedia solve
intelligence tests or let Wikipedia reason, plan, solve problems
independently we can talk about this."
You mean HUMAN intelligence? As long as you define intelligence as
necessarily human, all AI successes will be seen as failures (by
If in the "system" of human and wiki interaction, intelligence can be shown
to manifest in ways that are not attributable to the intelligence of the
human alone; would this satisfy your definition and open a way to consider
mine as well?
If an otherwise intelligent human were physically handicapped such that he
couldn't "solve intelligence tests independently" (couldn't use paper
pencil, for example) ... by your definition, he would not be intelligent.
"Wikipedia does not have to do anything with AI."
This is your official position? My position is that it does. You have
discounted my position by your preferences and have closed all avenues for