There should be a sticky about dangers of pessimism and how philosophical pessimism ought to be applied.

>Because it will take a special effort to make an ASI (more resources) it will not happen by accident.

Resources aren't accidental but what comes out of them pretty much is.

>So it should be possible to have AGI and not ASI.

Anything is possible but I wonder why you choose to talk about this possibility and not about the possibility of the Moon being cheese instead.

There's no time to waste with some people. You learn that some people are natural saboteurs who stand in the way. They will never change, it'll always come out of them.

It's good the skeptics out themselves so we can tell who can and cannot process information given to them.

There's actually a good lesson here. Deep Blue was completely predictable decades out, if you believed in continued accelerating returns that is. AlphaGo wasn't. Luckily it was just about a game that time.

It's the most reddit of comments - rhetorically insane, mundane in subject.

Maybe not laughable but possibly risky because changes could happen 10 or 100 times faster than that.

People will give you all kinds of strange answers but the truth is that it's the difference between subjective and objective change and your chosen perspective on it all.

Maybe we won't see each other did you think about that.

Is there a subreddit where people wait for the sunrise, maybe you could go pester them.

The argument that technology will exceed the complexity of our own is self evidently correct.

>this forum is mostly made up of sci fi lovers.

Are you too dull for scifi? Scifi doesn't equal wrong by the way.

IT'S NOT CIRCLE JERKING IF IT'S CORRECT. SAYING EARTH IS ROUND IS NOT CIRCLE JERKING.

How does the average person know this? Because he knows there are starving people in the world and he doesn't care. But the funny thing is I think the rich actually might care about starvation.

You can't have experience with the future systems. People have the right to be hyped, they are hyped for slightly wrong reasons but no matter. The significance of image and video generation is not that artists get the boot but it's that it's the computer vision problem in reverse. In roundabout way we've proved that computers and robots can now understand what they see. And that's the intelligence explosion.

This is the discussion that the "rationals" want to have, endless comparisons between GPT and Eliza...fuck off cunts.

If it does it only means that quantum computation is really easy.

First megaflops supercomputer was introduced in 1964 and the first gigaflops supercomputer in 1985 so it took 21 years. Now we expect that thousandfold increase to take 11 or 12 years so the doublings have been decreasing in time.

GPTs are already superhuman.

Only difference is capability.

Both of you guys say very strange things which are false.

>Remember that technology advances in an S curve.

Single technologies do, not the whole of technology.

At the very least we should expect linearly growing growth, like 300, 400, 550, 750...

No fire alarm.

Why are you asking stupid questions?