Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ziplock9000 t1_j5k978s wrote

That's a circular argument.

'They are superior, because they are superior' is the essence of what you've just said.

13

Practical-Mix-4332 t1_j5kbd7n wrote

I took it as they are superior because they have the internal knowledge and talent and years of experience at the bleeding edge of AI research, so based on those circumstances they are well-situated to continue their dominance in the field.

10

[deleted] t1_j5kazfw wrote

When did I state "They are superior, because they are superior" my statement was "I seriously doubt it because they are still way superior and they are likely to continue being superior". There is a clear difference, my statement talks about them being superior and that they will also be superior in the future, but I nowhere defend why they are superior because that wasn't my intention with that statement... The key is that the intention of my statement was to inform why they are likely to win the AI race rather than to argue why they are superior.

−1

[deleted] t1_j5n6en1 wrote

I think a great many people on this sub are just dumb. Like what you were saying was pretty clear and absolutely not what that guy claims you were saying lol

5