[Chai-T-Rex]

>The volunteers recognised cloned speech as such only half the time (ie, no better than chance).

That's incorrect. It's like saying that one lottery ticket has a 50% chance of winning. If they're fooling people half the time, that's way better than chance, since there are so many ways of screwing things up.

[obastani]

I think they are saying the volunteers performed no better than chance, i.e., volunteers are no better at guessing real vs. clone compared to randomly guessing. It's a really good outcome for the clone.

[jcoffland]

What is "chance"? In the article they mean no better than flipping a coin. You chose a lottery ticket analogy, but that choice was arbitrary.