> Human-like AI is a dead field, or at least dead as far we can tell. We're not even sure how to build it because conceptually we don't even have a grasp on con

> Human-like AI is a dead field, or at least dead as far we can tell. We're not even sure how to build it because conceptually we don't even have a grasp on consciousness or cognition. >Then there's the false assumption that we can get to this level before doing things like, say, solving all mental health issues and that it can magically be scaled to super-human speeds. For all we know cognition happens at a certain speed and any attempts past that are troublesome. On a purely physical level, this is hard to believe. We don't have precise models of consciousness and reasoning, but the general ones (bayesian reasoning, decision theories, etc) are speed-agnostic. It's hard to imagine one that isn't. > Look at how easily we suffer from mania and other issues when our natural limiters go haywire. Sure, our hardware sucks. Plus, that's even more the reason to worry about the singularity - if a very fast ai can think and plan, but suffers from mania, that's not a very good outcome. UFAI is an area of concern for many.