I was in a circumstance where someone read a palindrome that went on for a very, very long time out of a book. They seemed to be in awe, while I was less impressed.
me: "You could do that kind of thing with a computer."
girl: "A computer could understand the mechanical aspects of a palindrome. But it could not make one that was literary."
me: "That depends on the computer, and whose standards of literary you're using. I didn't think that sounded very impressively artistic. And really, if you have a human sending the computer back to the drawing board if the palindrome isn't to your tastes...it can keep evolving a response based on realizing what you're being picky about."
We were taken away from the palindrome reading to a hospital-like room, and shown behind some hanging curatins where there were two tiny toy cars--like Matchbox-car sized. A researcher gave us each a car.
researcher: "These are brand-new untrained AIs, that have only been given the concept of self as located in these cars. What we want you to do is take them into the next room and teach them concepts by relating them through the other toys."
We went into the next room, where there were a lot of different kinds of children's toys. Some were car or truck related, while others were things like plush toys.
researcher: "Show them "orgy""
My idea was to get all the car like things (what they might reasonably think of as other cars) and pile them all together, rubbing against each other. We acted fast, trying to gather and sort all the various things with wheels together.
Our rapidity in doing this gathering seemed to affect the cars interpretation to be based on our actions when it spoke.
car: (questioningly) "Orgy is...'running around'?"
Note
This indicates someone did not understand the nature of the experiment, because if the car was going to be looking at us and not the other toys, the girl and I should have had sex. :-P