As AI algorithms increasingly participate in daily activities, it becomes critical to ascertain whether the agents we interact with are human or not. To address this question, we turn to the Turing test and systematically benchmark current AIs in their abilities to imitate humans in three language tasks (Image captioning, Word association, and Conversation) and three vision tasks (Object detection, Color estimation, and Attention prediction). The experiments involved 549 human agents plus 26 AI agents for dataset creation, and 1,126 human judges plus 10 AI judges, in 25,650 Turing-like tests. The results reveal that current AIs are not far from being able to impersonate humans in complex language and vision challenges. While human judges were often deceived, simple AI judges outperformed human judges in distinguishing human answers from AI answers. The results of imitation tests are only minimally correlated with standard performance metrics in AI. Thus, evaluating whether a machine can pass as a human constitutes an important independent test to evaluate AI algorithms. The curated, large-scale, Turing datasets introduced here and their evaluation metrics provide new benchmarks and insights to assess whether an agent is human or not and emphasize the relevance of rigorous, systematic, and quantitative imitation tests in these and other AI domains.