I don't see it professing anything about monotheism, God, or anything like what you mentioned. You asked it about string theory and it provided a fair, accurate summary. It even points out "string theory also faces many challenges, such as the lack of experimental evidence, ...", and later calls it "a speculative and ambitious scientific endeavor that may or may not turn out to be correct". I think that's totally fair and accurate, no?

Despite it mentioning these things, you claim "That's not true" and that string theory is based on zero evidence and is backed by media. Personally, you sound a hell of a lot more biased and misleading than the bot.

When you're clustering or classifying, you are predicting something discrete (clusters/classes), so it's unclear what you mean by removing these hard cutoffs. There must be some kind of hard cutoff when doing clustering/classification unless you are okay with something having a fuzzy classification (e.g. 70% class A / 30% class B).

I think either is probably fine to learn. Both have roughly the same set of features at this point. TF used to be the pre-dominant framework, but PyTorch has gained popularity over the past few years. Now if it'll stay that way or there will be a new trend in the future, no one can say for sure.

It's a memory issue. Since the attention matrix scales quadratically (N^2) with sequence length (N), we simply don't have enough memory for long sequences. Most of the development around transformers/attention has been targeting this specific problem.

No, this is not a "definitive test for AGI". It just shows that the system is able to solve a single task. What if you give the same model a simple IQ test question and it fails miserably? Clearly it's not an AGI.

Eh. I think video evidence will actually hold up despite deep fakes. There just has to be strong control measures. Already we admit all sorts of evidence into court which could be faked: things like documents and text messages. But they are admitted because we can explain exactly where they came from

Wikipedia? The ANN page has a pretty comprehensive summary of the history and over 150 references.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_neural_network

Well of course. They just usually aren't as good on unstructured data (pictures, video, text, etc.). If they start performing better, then people will use them. Simple as that.