How does this not make sense? As far as I can tell, your points don't apply to what I said. I'll quote myself: >The idea that machines couldn't do everything

How does this not make sense? As far as I can tell, your points don't apply to what I said. I'll quote myself: >The idea that machines couldn't do everything a human can do (and more) doesn't make any sense to me. In other words, it doesn't make sense to me when I hear impossibility arguments about AGI that appeal to something special about humans. I'm not making a claim about software and hardware in 2023. I'm saying in principle, there is nothing stopping us from building artificial systems that are just as complex and capable as evolved biological organisms, other than our lack of knowledge of how to build such systems. >Software does not because it has not evolved Software does evolve. To get evolution you need three things: replication, mutation, and selection pressure. We replicate, mutate, and select software all the time. I don't think you need a large scale simulation to get evolutionary dynamics. >Humans may be like robots but their programing is not statistical pattern matching or Boolean logic That might be true, but I'm also skeptical. Part of the problem is we don't really understand intelligence very well. If we really understood what makes humans capable of intelligent behavior, we would be able to replicate it in artificial systems. I don't see a fundamental barrier other than having the right algorithms.