Before I can answer the question, I must first admit doubt to “machine intelligence” as most machines are a mere reflection of the programs they have been coded with. However, if an actual test for intelligence is necessary, then I would state that while Alan’s test is not the best, it is definitely useful. Because this test, as I mentioned before, seems to be a game of what the machine can regurgitate, it is an accurate representation of what the machine can truly respond to and how it can, if programmed accordingly like many are today, imitate and respond as if the machine can think, on their own. The fact that I have to include “on their own” means that no information they posses comes directly from their own doing. Intelligence is based on being able to retrieve information on their own and machines cannot. There are many arguments against this test that I completely agree with. The test is tailored for the machine to succeed. It asks questions and places the machine in situations where it cannot fail which is not realistic humanistic approach. I am sure there are changes that can be made to better this test so that the outcome is more realistic and the oppositions decrease, but I am unsure what they are. The only change I can foresee is being able to program the machine to retrieve information on its own, which I am not sure if it is possible.