>What's the simplest mental-labor task that you are confident that AI will not be able to do within the next ten years? any task where hallucinations and non-d

>What's the simplest mental-labor task that you are confident that AI will not be able to do within the next ten years? any task where hallucinations and non-determinism are unacceptable. so... a lot of them. hallucinations are an inherent flaw of "AI", not a bug that can be fixed. "AI" is a glorified data compression algorithm - a very lossy one. improvements - more/better training data, higher parameter count, etc - can't fix that fundamental limitation. I see the "AI" (and its plausible future iterations) as yet another neat little thing that will enhance but not replace us. we can (and routinely do) create things that outperform our brains by orders and orders of magnitude in specific applications. calculators did not make mathematicians obsolete - all of our combined (peta/exa/yotta/whatever)flop computation capacity can't replace an elementary school math teacher, let alone someone like Terence Tao (and "AI" often fails at the most basic math despite having been fed possibly every math textbook in existence, which clearly demonstrates that it's "A" but not "I"). the point I'm trying to make is the tech we have is "AI", but the doomsday alarmism is presented as if we have (or will soon have) actual AI. I've read so much of nauseatingly overconfident "experts say" appeal-to-authority bullshit in the past decade about a variety of topics, I can clearly tell that we're going through another phase of hype and mass hysteria. plenty of technologies have stagnated and even regressed in the past. AI hype gives me strong space era vibes - have there been an equivalent of HN back then, people would speculate about fighting Ivans on Mars, the consequences of post-scarcity brought about by mining resources from other planets, the ethics of space colonization, etc. and now - almost a century later - it's still sci-fi bullshit.