“The MGH Translational Research Center has a clinical research support agreement with Neuralink, Paradromics and Synchron, for which L.R.H. provides consultative input. J.M.H. is a consultant for Neuralink, and serves on the Medical Advisory Board of Enspire DBS. K.V.S. consults for Neuralink and CTRL-Labs (part of Facebook Reality Labs) and is on the scientific advisory boards of MIND-X, Inscopix and Heal.”

I'm quite sure at this point that you understand what I mean even if my examples weren't that great.

In your initial post you asserted that AIs will never surpass humans in what you called "subjectively meaningful tasks", citing their lack of i) will, ii) life and iii) ability to sense the world around them, as arguments.
I gave my argument for why I believe they may, which is that I think our brains can be perfectly modeled as computing machines.

Ultimately I hope you're right, that would make humans truly special. I replied in the hope of hearing more about your thoughts and arguments for your position.

Seeing how you fail to give any arguments to support your point and instead have resorted to ad hominem and trying to funny, it's pretty clear you don't have any.

Thanks anyway for commenting to my initial question.

isnt this old news?

Happiness doesn't pair well with power, only balance does. I don't get why people keep chasing power, building powerful tools just because they can when it clearly shows that power doesn't give them a loving, happy and healthy life. People in the modern day era are living a convenient yet boring and depressive life, when cyborgs come, nothing will ever change, power will keep scaling up and most power belongs the minority who control it.

Google will announce a ton of A.I. products in its I/O event in May, 2023 but with GPT-4 and ChatGPT, will it be enough to respond to Microsoft and the pace of OpenAI's momentum?

I guess we need to switch from a ‘slave’ to a ‘nobility’ mindset. AI is a better slave than you can ever be so it leaves you no choice but to be a master.

If you can’t be a small cog in the machine, become its desire engine, the will that sets it in motion.

You may take over the AI that has taken over your job, and see what new, grander goals you can achieve with it.

Computers used to be human, it was a job. Rooms full of people computing with pen and paper. Artificial computers took it over. Yet we’re not regretting that, I bet most don’t even know the fact. You’re not trying to keep up with your Artificial Personal Computer, rather it’s a symbiotic relationship, arguably it’s a mental prosthetic, an exoself, and you’re already a cyborg.

Humanity can’t be rendered useless because it never was useful in the first place. Fulfilment of purpose is pleasure, and purpose is arbitrary.

Make the world a better place? Humanity is destroying this world’s biodiversity, so arguably, destroying humanity would make the world a better place (I’m talking like a rogue AI lol, just trying to show the relativity of such purpose).

A more constructive goal would be to colonise space so as to spread life, reduce the load on our little planet, preserve life in case of a cataclysm. I think it would be awesome! But even that is arbitrary. ‘Life’ didn’t ask for it and can’t be thankful.

Ehh… that’s a little ableist don’t you think 😂

But on a serious note, I disagree. There’s a reason many people like playing games on the harder difficulties. (And sometimes they want even harder difficulties than those). It’s because when things are too easy, they become boring. They’re nothing fulfilling or gratifying about a life of total hedonism. And while certainly nobody wants a life that’s too difficult. It remains to be seen whether or not humans will truly enjoy a life with absolutely no responsibility or stakes like many here assume we will. I think that’s what OP and I were really getting at. Just my two cents

It’s gonna be like Futurama where they send you away when you reach a certain age.

Proof of concept.

Because there is something fundamentally broken in him.

Says them.

edit: I think I misread that. They exist by duping people.

Working for a soulless oil company that lays people off like the plague sure fulfills my needs for self worth. Thank god some one is saying it.

I'm not sure politicians exist because they're needed

First megaflops supercomputer was introduced in 1964 and the first gigaflops supercomputer in 1985 so it took 21 years. Now we expect that thousandfold increase to take 11 or 12 years so the doublings have been decreasing in time.

> The value and beauty of art is in the eyes of the beholder. Ultimately, until our machines exhibit a will and life of their own, and the ability to sense the world about them what they create is meaningless.

The meaning, or lack thereof, of what they create is in the eyes of the beholder, not the creator.

Where can we get this feature and what is it called?

Singularity will emerge after AI becomes widely used and has its own freedom. No doubt about it.

If AI is beyond human control, we either live a life of conflict, submission, or annihilation.

If AI is within human control, it will simply elevate the conflicts we already have. But the struggle for meaning will largely be the same. Achievement, glory, pleasure, acceptance.

If you're concerned about craft being overtaken by AI, have no fear - there are people still making things by hand which should've been eliminated by mass production.

And your opinion is that as it becomes more intelligent it will become less psychotic, and my opinion is that this is wishful thinking and that a robot Hannibal Lector is a terrifying proposition.

Because some people read Mein Campf and think “oh that’s awful” and other people read the same book and think “that’s a blueprint for a successful world”.

>Insilico said it’s currently not interested in pursuing clinical trials for the potential drug; it’ll leave that for other researchers to follow now that the molecule has been publicly identified. Instead, the main purpose of the study was to serve as a “proof of concept” of what is now possible with AI, said Alán Aspuru-Guzik, a professor of computer science and chemistry at U of T, director of the Acceleration Consortium and the co-principal investigator who led the study.

So there won’t be any follow up with this drug.

Yeah, it still represents an exponential growth of human potential. The problem is that humans are monsters.

I agree, human + AI working together is already and AGI. With only limit of the human part being unscaleable. And can be extremely dangerous if AI part is very powerful and both are non-aligned with fundamental human values.

A very, very dumb machine; extremely creative, very "clever", but not self aware or very 'intelligent' at all, like a raptor...

Edit: "made in the image of its god" as it were... 😂

The same argument has been made about google, and it's a real concern. Some moron killed his wife a week or so ago, and the headline read 'Suspect google history included 'How to hide a 140lb body''

So, yeah. It's already a problem.

Right now we deal with it by having Google keep records and hoping criminals who google shit like that are just too stupid to use a VPN or anonymous internet.

Again, we don't need AGI to have that problem. It's already here.

That's the whole point of my comment. We need to stop waiting for AGI before we start to treat these systems as being capable of existential change for the human race.

I'm not comparing it to a human being, I'm saying many, many, jobs could be automated if we could take a single function of the lowest working human.