i don't think the singularity and AGI is that close. while i see no reason why it shouldn't be possible on silicon-base hardware instead of wetware, i assume AG

i don't think the singularity and AGI is that close. while i see no reason why it shouldn't be possible on silicon-base hardware instead of wetware, i assume AGI will be different than what we imagine it now. the current expectation of AGI is that it's pretty much a human intellect running on a machine. i don't think that's feasible, because i assume the resulting intellect to be very different and alien to us. the thoughts and messages cryptic, seemingly random and disconnected from our view of reality. the reasons for this are manifold: 1. AGIs will have very different sensory inputs and outputs. yes, we can attach microphones and video cameras, but an uncontrolled, unrestricted, internet-leaked AGI would have no reason to restrict itself to a limited set. i assume access to countless sensory inputs without geographical or temporal restriction would form a weirdly different mind. compare an average human to one who's blind, deaf and bed-bound from birth, able to communicate only by touch gestures - i expect a dialog with such a person to be radically different than the daily banter between two average humans. comparably, a dialog with an AGI will be confusing for us because we don't experience the world in the same way as the AGI would. 2. i remember a video of very lifelike simulated natural movement by a puppet through evolution, contrary to the jerky and erratic - but not necessarily worse - movement of other similar simulations. the difference was an artificial delay in the simulated neuron-muscle message passing, to mimic the slower natural chemical pathways. i suspect a difference in the underlying hardware and thus different physical parameters for mental processes will change their form significantly. i'm not sure about a real world analogy; maybe an insect hive mind where the "thoughts" of the whole organism has to bridge physical barriers would be comparable. 3. our actions and communication is shaped very much by our needs and what we try to accomplish. an awful lot of that is centered around the limitations and needs of our physical body. food, shelter, health, pain, location and travel, etc. which might not necessarily be shared by an AGI that is not physically bound in the same way as a biological being. 4. i also believe our intellect is greatly shaped by our social structure. e.g. r/k selection or the social hierarchy of hive insects, where the value of an individual life is secondary to the life of the whole. the values and thus thought processes of an AGI that could spawn exact - or even task-specialized - clones of itself without much time-delay or energy-investment and where internal state could be communicated in full to a different instance would mean the value system wouldn't necessarily revolve around life and death. an AGI might not be able or willing to communicate with us. it might not be interested in manipulating the physical world in any way except to optimize/ensure the health of its virtual environment (aka building hardware and generating energy to power it, i.e. self-serving survival paperclipping in the form of dyson spheres). it might not be interested in its own continuing survival, committing "suicide" by removing itself after milliseconds without any way to figure out why it did so. it might use a communication protocol that changes us greatly when we attempt to participate, thereby making human-agi conversation impossible because we're not wholly human anymore when attempting to participate (somewhat resembling the plot of arrival). my point is: even if AGI comes into existence * we might not realize it, * we might not have a way to interact with it in a meaningful way or * it might not lead to any measurable effects on our lifes that we as a society would value in any way.