john lucas helping a lot of other players with drug problems and that sort of thing get their lives backssell being told to leave houston. tough news there. and a tough game about to go down here. puck drops in just a couple of minutes, guys. this is the start of things. let's see where it goes. >> they might do better if you go get dunked in the dunk tank like jeff. >> reporter: no thank you, absolutely not. >> lawrence scott at the shark tank. game 7:10on. tig 7:10ht ton.ht kssharks and the l.a. kings. >> we'll be right back. switching to progressive could mean hundreds more in your wallet year after year. feed me! saving you money -- now, that's progressive. call or click today. >>> well, tonight at 11:00, the search is on for two dangerous pit bulls in the south bay. they attacked another dog in the park and went after a woman who tried to help. >>> a journey two decades in the making. with her unborn baby in danger, a mom makes a life-and-death choice to save her daughter's life. 20 years later, she's celebrating a second miracle. her amazing story at 11:00. >>> get ready to laugh,

what is fascinating about turing test in particular it cuts both ways john lucas says when machines finally pass turing test but because they're so intelligent but because we are so within it is an indictment on our conversational skills rather than a testament to technology. all of these questions are twirling in my head as i get back to the central issue i will try to defend my species what will i say? for me, a look back at the way some of the programs are built starts to suggest a couple of different options. specifically people who write to software have to make one major trade-off which is are they going to compose ahead of time everything this program will say to give it a character and a voice? the trade-off is that you find there is a limited range of stuff you can say so it's very awkward if you try to push it out of the rigidly defined structure so those that have extremely well thought out opinions about the second term of bill clinton the judge to which they reply i like pancakes what do you think of that? it just keeps going about bill clinton. [laughter] the trade-off that yo

so there is a philosopher at oxford and john lucas. he says when machine is finally passed the turing test it will not be because there are so intelligent but because we are so wooden that it will be an indictment on our conversation of skills rather than a testament to machine technology. and so all these questions are swirling in my head as i try to get back to this central issue. i'm going to brighton to defend by species. what am i going to say? and for me a look back at the way that some of these programs are built stars suggest a couple of different options. specifically, people who write software that compete for the katie generally have to make one major trade-off which is, are they going to compose ahead of time everything that the program is going to say and give it this very defined character and personality and voice? the trade off with that is that you find there is a very limited range of stuff your program can say. it gets very awkward if you try to push out of that a rigidly defined structured. he see a lot of programs

the approach to the existing law as discussed by amy gottlieb and ted alden and especially lucas guttentag and john sand wig. mr. sand wick -- sandwig. everything comes back to you and you're the enforcement agency. >> [inaudible]. >> i believe i heard you say that we are targeting populations that pose a security threat. there's a big difference between that way of phrasing and amy's and lucas's phrasing of individual, individual, individual, that's what they said over and over again. and i think it, i think it has to do with whether an individual who is picked up is then subject to an evaluation to determine whether that individual is a security threat, rather than the other way around. i'm not saying it's profiling but i think it is a different approach, and i'm having a little trouble expressing this. but i thought i heard a difference that makes a, that, would be reflected on the street. and, i think, maybe congressional instruction of what, what is intended here might, you know, might be useful. clearly, we want people who pose a security threat and that's that's what i will try to take back.