> And then there’s also this startling progress that A.I. has been making in solving math problems that no normal people understand, but that even mathematician

> And then there’s also this startling progress that A.I. has been making in solving math problems that no normal people understand, but that even mathematicians who do understand the problems find to be important. Reading this sentence, I've wondered: Were the reactions similar back when computers were new? There's this new tech that greatly accelerates stuff. And through that, what was previously considered hard to solve got easier to solve. Wasn't it always the case that technology suddenly did faster than experts limited to the technology of their time did? And didn't those experts always think that the problems it could solve are important? Why else build the technology? Is that not why we're building this in the first place? __ The only real difference I see is this "sentience" stuff leading to the whole "omg it does things on its own", and that by now has been discussed, debunked and flamewared over ad-nauseam. Can we please stop. The only thing sentient, making decisions and - most importantly - being accountable is whoever prompts the thing. If it prompts itself, then that's the person that built the loop software that does that. It really is not that hard. If whoever does that doesn't want to take accountability then we have solutions for that. They're called "a large stick".