Basman

More computing power doesn't follow that it becomes sentient. Computing power just increases. It's a leap in logic to assume that scaleability turns into general intelligence.

That's currently just a fantasy. There doesn't exist anything that approaches that nor do we know where to even begin. We don't know if it's possible. It's like saying "one day we'll have flying cars". No, what you get is tanks with fur. The future is nigh impossible to predict in a neat way that follows some kind of popular archetype. The popular idea of AI is just the idea of a computer scaled up in a linear fashion till it becomes so powerful it becomes sentient and smarter than humans. It's a mythical conventien of how computers work from the 80s.

That's also very algorythmic, because it's the thing people are talking about. "Tons" is also an exaggeration when it's merely a fraction of the total population making anecdotes. It's an echochamber. Even the research that the article here is based of is of a small sample size from memory. It's all very anecdotal (with an incentive to talk about it) and I think there is a lack of solid data. How do you even know people where ever "approaching" in the first place?

Being reactionary without understanding what's actually being said.

If you have the cure, why don't you go and make fat stacks and save lives?

Speaking of intelligence, one issue I see lot is a general lack of comprehension ability, especially online. So often people will go "what's wrong with Y" when you wrote X unless you meticulously handhold people through your thoughts, leaving nothing between the lines. And even then people will misread you because they get emotional or are biased.

You got a problem with the medical establishment in general mate.

I'm not so optimistic that's possible. That line of thinking skews easily into hyperbole. I'll believe when I see it.

That's basically kind of how elites date. Very strategic (though maybe less so these days, not sure). The classic of forming alliances through marriage back when marriage was less about personal expression but as a means to survival. I think it's fine to treat relationships more like a business as long as you know what your getting into. What that would look like nowadays in practice, especially since I think your a woman, is dating rich dudes. They are the one's with the most connections and leverage to make things happen. Though your not going to have your cake and eat it too realistically when it comes to both having connections and resources and looks. If your serious about gold digging you have to be ruthless with your results, which means you likely need to be flexible with your preferences. Past elite women would marry disgusting men for power and wealth (and then divorce them later lol).

How does someone create something more intelligent than itself? I don't think that possible, thus AI can't be more intelligent than humans. The fact that it needs to copy copius amounts of human data means that it doesn't have a logic of its own.

AI hype got hijacked to artificially pump the stocks of certain companies like Nvidia by strategically investing into each other in a circular fashion. It turned into a grift as soon as the hype reached a certain level. It's rare for hype to actually live up to itself, even if the product does have certain merit. Some bubble bursting is to be expected, but the hype was mighty inflated this time.

By not giving a shit.

Humans have evolved to conserve energy. It's less that the average person is dumb and more like they don't bother expending the energy to expand their worldview. Especially if they are very conformist and haven't had the privilege of education. But there also different kinds of intelligence. It's unintelligent to measure intelligence by a single metric. A lot of users here are quiet autistic and are unintelligent in certain ways where the average person would be more intelligent, like social skills or sanity.

But at the same time our capacity for destruction is greater than ever. We can easily become the most destructive period in human history. In large part, geopolitical stalemate is what's keeping things in check. Technological development doesn't guarantee utopia. It makes things worse in a lot of way, the climate crisis being a prime example. A surveillance state isn't desirable either.

Femcels are typically very argumentative in an anti-social and condecending way. Even in real life they just want to debate lord. They are gremlins who just want to feed of negative energy. I'm yet to see any messaging from them that is constructive and truthful.