Nope. That "argument" is called "hand-waving" by actual scientists and is the hallmark of clueless amateurs.

This probably does not even pan out on the statistical side. And statistics comes with anomalies on top of that.

And here it pays off to have good infrastructure. Something the US never understood. This will not be an issue in the actually developed part of the western world. For example, we have 30kV lines under the curb here, each one can deliver something like 20-50MW right there. Per cable.

It is sad that only China seems to realize this. But better they do it and we have it available than nobody does it.

No. It is a fundamental limit. Context window size has nothing to do with it. And incidentally, I can have cases where a web-page should very much crash a browser or at least a tab.

Exactly. There is no credible theory and there is no known mechanism. Hence we do not know we can do it. There is also no proof we cannot do it, but there is a lot of indicators that say we probably cannot. Obviously, stupid people do not understand indicators. But the fact of the matter is that we do not understand how general intelligence works physically, that we only observe it ins some humans and that we do not even know how life works.

So "never" is actually a real possibility. I do get that the Physicalist morons think their religion is Science. That comes from them actually not understanding Science and mistaking it for some kind of magic.

Not in this case. If the implementation team had any contact at all (!) with the original sources, the thing is not "clean room" anymore. The laws are very strict here. That is why clean room reimplementations are so exceptionally rare.

Indeed. But it would be more like 1000x or even higher.

Not at all. It starts with the "product" being static. You have no dev-team at all and you cannot even do small changes. Security, performance and reliability will suck. The product has no copyright. And proving that this was "clean room" is almost impossible as that would require a thorough and careful examination of all training data that even remotely looks like code.

This is really just useable as satire to point out a problem.

Since this is satire, that is not a problem.

But for an actual clean room reimplementation, you need that the implementation team never has looked at the original code. Since a lot of FOSS went into the training data for this "demo", that is very likely not the case and hence this is not "clean room" at all. Oh, and also note that the product generated this way has no copyright at all ...

And that is the people developing and maintaining it. Definitely a commendable satiric effort though that shows we cannot continue the lawlessness we currently have. It will destroy too many things.

Obviously, on the side of security, performance and stability, these clones will also not be worth much, so the "threat" is probably really small.

Oh, and while we are at it "Red Alert" is not actually a bug severity level. For that there is, e.g. the CVE score. But that one comes with a definition, so lying (even if only by misdirection) becomes much harder and things will look a lot less impressive, if at all. But nil wits like you are apparently very impressed by "Red Alert", so they are using that.

You think Mozilla has no reason to hype AI? And you took that belief right out of your behind, I take it?

Incidentally, you just nicely demonstrated that you either cannot read or are quite dishonest.

You clearly do not understand what a "hardened target" is. Details and context matter. Even if AI and people like you cannot do it.

True. That "singularity" idea is completely disconnected from reality. It is essentially a belief that a machine will become God, and it is a belief with absolutely no supporting evidence.