[SAI_Peregrinus]

And there's a more general sort of Turing test:

Just like the original test, there are 3 participants in a test: an examiner, a human, and an AI.

The examiner may ask any question or series of questions to the human &/or AI, and receive responses. This is done via text or other means which prevent the examiner from directly seeing the body of responder.

Both AI and human are to attempt to convince the examiner that they're the human.

Unlike the original test, it then needs to repeat with different examiners.

If there exists an examiner which can distinguish an AI from a human (for all humans) in a Turing test with probability non-negligibly different from 50%, then the AI fails this meta-Turing Test.

Just because an AI can fool some people doesn't mean it's a human-equivalent intelligence.

[TeMPOraL]

Your "meta-Turing Test" is rigged. There are 8 billion humans on this planet, statistically someone is bound to be able to distinguish AI from a human with near-100% accuracy across a reasonable amount of rounds through sheer chance.

Existence is too strong a criterion. Even correcting for random chance, if there's 1, 10, 100, even 1 000 000 examiners who could distinguish an AI from a human with high probability, that steal means the AI passed the test in practice, because even a million examiners is still a rounding error compared to the human population.