1 files changed, 131 insertions, 31 deletions
diff --git a/english/homereading-sem5/homereading-sem5.tex b/english/homereading-sem5/homereading-sem5.tex
index 33531a0..88f3eb1 100644
--- a/english/homereading-sem5/homereading-sem5.tex
+++ b/english/homereading-sem5/homereading-sem5.tex
@@ -1,5 +1,13 @@
 \documentclass{beamer}
-\usetheme{}
+
+\usepackage[T2A]{fontenc}
+\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
+\usepackage{tempora}
+
+\usepackage[russian]{babel}
+\inputencoding{utf8}
+
+\usetheme{Madrid}
 
 \title{``Computing Machinery and Intelligence'' by A.~M.~Turing}
 \subtitle{Home reading, 5th semester}
@@ -7,66 +15,158 @@
 \date{\today}
 
 \begin{document}
+\maketitle
 
 \begin{frame}
   \frametitle{About author}
-  
+
+  Alan Turing was an English mathematician and computer scientist. He
+  was very influential in development of theoretical computer sciences
+  and is widely considered to be the father of artificial intelligence.
+
+  The paper named in the title considered seminal in the field of
+  artificial intelligence. It was published in 1950 in academic journal
+  ``Mind'' by Oxford University Press, where it first introduced the
+  concept now known as ``Turing Test'' to general public.
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-  \frametitle{Summary of article}
-  
+  \frametitle{Summary of paper}
+
+  In this paper Turing considers question ``Can machines think?'' as
+  wrong and proposes the new form of this problem. This new question
+  in terms of the ``imitation game''.
+
+  This game played with three people: man, woman and
+  interrogator. Interrogator stays in separate room from others. His
+  goal is to determine which of the other two is man and which is
+  woman. If we replace one of people with machine, Turing believed
+  that we can replace the original question with ``Will interrogator
+  decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this as he does
+  when the game is played between man and woman?''.
+
+  In the remainder of the paper, he argued against all the major
+  objections to the proposition that ``machines can think''.
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-- The definitions might be framed so as to reflect so far as possible
-  the normal use of the words, but this attitude is dangerous, If the
-  meaning of the words "machine" and "think" are to be found by
-  examining how they are commonly used it is difficult to escape the
-  conclusion that the meaning and the answer to the question, "Can
-  machines think?" is to be sought in a statistical survey such as a
-  Gallup poll.
+  \begin{block}{}
+    The definitions might be framed so as to reflect so far as
+    possible the normal use of the words, but this attitude is
+    dangerous. If the meaning of the words ``machine'' and ``think''
+    are to be found by examining how they are commonly used it is
+    difficult to escape the conclusion that the meaning and the answer
+    to the question, ``Can machines think?'' is to be sought in a
+    statistical survey such as a Gallup poll.
+  \end{block}
+  \onslide<2->
+  \begin{block}{}
+    Определение может быть сформулировано таким образом, чтобы
+    отражать повседневное значение этих слов, однако подобный способ
+    таит в себе опасности. Если определять значение слов ``машина'' и
+    ``мыслить'' в соответствии с употреблением этих слов в обиходе,
+    трудно будет избежать вывода о том, что ответ на вопрос: ``Может
+    ли машина мыслить?'' следует искать в данных статистических
+    исследований, вроде опросов Гэллапа.
+  \end{block}
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-- We are the more ready to do so in view of the fact that the present
-  interest in "thinking machines" has been aroused by a particular
-  kind of machine, usually called an "electronic computer" or "digital
-  computer."
+  \begin{block}{}
+    We are the more ready to do so in view of the fact that the
+    present interest in ``thinking machines'' has been aroused by a
+    particular kind of machine, usually called an ``electronic
+    computer'' or ``digital computer.''
+  \end{block}
+  \onslide<2->
+  \begin{block}{}
+    Мы более склонны так сделать с учётом того, что наш интерес в
+    ``думающих машинах'' был вызван машиной определённого рода, обычно
+    называемой ``электронным компьютером'' или ``цифровым
+    компьютером''.
+  \end{block}
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-- If we use the above explanation as a definition we shall be in
-  danger of circularity of argument.
+  \begin{block}{}
+    If we use the above explanation as a definition we shall be in
+    danger of circularity of argument.
+  \end{block}
+  \onslide<2->
+  \begin{block}{}
+    Если принять данное выше объяснение за определение, то мы рискуем
+    прийти к круговому рассуждению.
+  \end{block}
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-- For instance in considering the switches for a lighting system it is
-  a convenient fiction that each switch must be definitely on or
-  definitely off.
+  \begin{block}{}
+    For instance in considering the switches for a lighting system it
+    is a convenient fiction that each switch must be definitely on or
+    definitely off.
+  \end{block}
+  \onslide<2->
+  \begin{block}{}
+    Например, рассматривая переключатели света, удобно считать, что
+    каждый из переключателей может быть либо точно выключен, либо
+    точно включён.
+  \end{block}
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-- The popular view that scientists proceed inexorably from
-  well-established fact to well-established fact, never being
-  influenced by any improved conjecture, is quite mistaken.
+  \begin{block}{}
+    The popular view that scientists proceed inexorably from
+    well-established fact to well-established fact, never being
+    influenced by any improved conjecture, is quite mistaken.
+  \end{block}
+  \onslide<2->
+  \begin{block}{}
+    Распространённое мнение, что учёные не раздумывая переходят от
+    одного хорошо установленного факта к другому, никогда не
+    основываясь на каком-то неподтверждённом предположении, в корне
+    неверно.
+  \end{block}
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-- It is admitted that there are certain things that He cannot do such
-  as making one equal to two, but should we not believe that He has
-  freedom to confer a soul on an elephant if He sees fit?
+  \begin{block}{}
+    It is admitted that there are certain things that He cannot do
+    such as making one equal to two, but should we not believe that He
+    has freedom to confer a soul on an elephant if He sees fit?
+  \end{block}
+  \onslide<2->
+  \begin{block}{}
+    Признано, что существуют некоторые вещи, которые Бог не способен
+    выполнить, например сделать единицу равной двум, но можем ли мы не
+    верить в то, что Бог способен даровать душу слону, если Он
+    посчитает нужным.
+  \end{block}
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-- We like to believe that Man is in some subtle way superior to the
-  rest of creation.
+  \begin{block}{}
+    We like to believe that Man is in some subtle way superior to the
+    rest of creation.
+  \end{block}
+  \onslide<2->
+  \begin{block}{}
+    Нам нравится верить в то, что Человек в некоторой степени
+    находится выше всей остальной природы.
+  \end{block}
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
-- The view that machines cannot give rise to surprises is due, I
-  believe, to a fallacy to which philosophers and mathematicians are
-  particularly subject.
+  \begin{block}{}
+    The view that machines cannot give rise to surprises is due, I
+    believe, to a fallacy to which philosophers and mathematicians are
+    particularly subject.
+  \end{block}
+  \onslide<2->
+  \begin{block}{}
+    Мнение о том, что машины не способны удивить основано на, как мне
+    кажется, заблуждении, которому особенно подвержены математики и
+    философы.
+  \end{block}
 \end{frame}
 
 \end{document}