3 ms·
Well, you should show the proof that it is possible also, So it would be a draw. I really think it is not possible to get that from a machine. You can improve
by germandiago 1y ago
Well, you should show the proof that it is possible also, So it would be a draw.
I really think it is not possible to get that from a machine. You can improve and do much fancier than now.
But AGI would be something entirely different. It is a system that can do everything better than a human including creativity, which I believe it to be exclusively human as of now.
It can combine, simulate and reason. But think out of the box? I doubt so. It is different to being able to derive ideas from which human would create. For that it can be useful. But that would not be AGI.
- jibal 1y agoThe burden of proof is on the person who makes a claim, especially an absolute existential claim like that. You have failed the burden of proof and of intellectual honesty. Over and out.
- germandiago 1y agoYou make the claim that AGI can exist, right? I make the claim it cannot. Both are claims, try to not manipulate the language. I acknowledge I started this but there is not a position that is better than the other.
- jibal 1y agoP.S. > You make the claim that AGI can exist, right? No, I obviously never made any such claim ... all I said was "Proof?" > I make the claim it cannot. Which remains unsupported. > try to not manipulate the language Another false charge. > I acknowledge I started this but there is not a position that is better than the other. Again, only you made an absolute claim. Honesty is better than appalling dishonesty.