Totally agree, great read. AFAICT the core argument is about how “complex systems” are complex, and machines are less complex than brains because brains have qu

Totally agree, great read. AFAICT the core argument is about how “complex systems” are complex, and machines are less complex than brains because brains have quantum magic. I feel like that’s a MASSIVE oversimplification of complexity theories (based on the very light touches I got in school years ago), kinda like papers about how the presence of “imaginary” numbers proves that there’s a multiverse or other terminology misapplications. Plus this chapter list is funny: Part III: The limits and potential of AI 9. Why there will be no machine intelligence 9.1 Brain emulation and machine evolution 9.2 Intentions and drivenness 9.3 Consciousness 9.4 Philosophy of mind, computation and AI 9.5 Objectifying intelligence and theoretical thinking 10. Why machines will not master human language 10.1 Language as a necessary condition for AGI 10.2 Why machine language production always falls short 10.3 AI conversation emulation 10.4 Mathematical models of human conversations 10.5 Why conversation machines are doomed to fail 11. Why machines will not master social interaction 11.1 No AI emulation of social behaviour 11.2 AI and legal norms 11.3 No machine emulation of morality Of all those, I think _one_ subsection clearly relates to math? I hope this isn’t too snarky, thanks to original commenter for posting it - I love looking back at stuff like this either way, and this post in particular brought me much joy. Sadly not gonna pick this one up lol