3 ms·

Nicely illustrated in Transcendence (2014). Widely panned on HN back then. I found it smart, perhaps even prescient.

• hathawsh 4y ago
  I also liked Transcendence, but you have to admit the path to AGI was vastly oversimplified. No one is creating AI by uploading their brain into a computer.
  • tpmx 4y ago
    Sure, you had to suspend your belief at times (if I recall correctly they left in enough ambiguity to make it kinda work if you squinted a little), but the good parts more than compensated for that.
  • Enginerrrd 4y ago
    I actually really disagree. I think that's a VERY plausible way for a true AGI to come about. In fact, prior to LLM's I used to think that was the ONLY way we were going to get an AGI. We know humans are AGI's. If it were possible to upload your brain to a computer, and then make modifications to enhance your speed of thought and intelligence, of course you would do that. It actually makes a LOT of sense if you'll admit the technology necessary to do that. In fact... uploading your brain to a computer is probably the most natural progression of intelligent life I can think of. It solves SO many problems. Biology is fragile. Brains cannot be replicated. But data can. A probe can travel the galaxy. It's not limited by biological lifespans and life support.
    • tpmx 4y ago
      Yeah. A better counterpoint would have been "but your brain scanning tech is subpar", to which I say phooey, it's a fiction movie.
• byteware 4y ago
  I was so psyched about this movie, but the idea that an AI that can design new quantum processors in seconds, is even remotely challenged by a few humans is just so stupid
  • dudeinjapan 4y ago
    Yeah but it's a Johnny Depp AI we're talking about here...
  • Enginerrrd 4y ago
    It wasn't even remotely challenged by humans. In the end, it simply allowed itself to be destroyed. (At least, ostensibly.)
• dudeinjapan 4y ago
  Amen. Transcendence was not without flaws, but most critics seemed to be missing the forest for the trees...