The day will come that an AI will learn something that we did not deliberately teach it. When an AI is able to improve its own code, it won't be bound by the limitations of its human creator. It's only a question of when.

LK

Experiments can be crafted in such a way as to exclude certain human beings from consciousness.

One day, it's extremely likely that a machine will say to us "I am alive. I am awake. I want..." and whether or not it's true is going to be increasingly hard to determine.

LK

Only if we define consciousness to be a state of awareness only attainable by human beings.

Can we?

It's only a matter of time until an AI can learn to do something it wasn't programmed by us to do.

Can a non-biological entity feel desire? Can it want to grow and become something more than what it is? I think that's a philosophical question and not a technological one.

LK

It wasn't terrible. I miss getting together with a few like-minded people who were excited to see a show together and discuss it afterward every week.

II, too, do not know what he means by "innovation." It sounds like standard CEO conference-speak blather to me. How do you "innovate" in gaming when your staff's top priority is clinging desperately to their jobs?

It will it replace character artists and level designers, but not as quickly as they want. In the mean time it's a net drag on the company as they learn and adjust.

Peoples opinions of AI are becoming polarized to the detriment of us all. Either it's going to be the apocalypse and also be completely useless and also take over everyone's jobs or it's going to create utopia and leave everyone fully employed.

The problem is panic culture, choosing safety over liberty and zero tolerance ass covering.

Here is the xkcd you were thinking of.

>outright lies
Your side would have won the election if you had gone about it honestly.

Sorry, there are no "extra cameras" on these robots

Work is a necessary evil: a means to an end rather than an end in itself. Bertrand Russell expressed this idea well in his essay In Praise of Idleness. Forcing (or wanting) a company to hire people for unnecessary work is a fundamentally flawed approach. It undermines economic efficiency by adding pointless costs and hindering innovation. An efficient economy can support more people through welfare or universal basic income than the same economy made inefficient by requiring companies to hire unneeded workers. Progress should free people from unnecessary toil, not preserve it.

while(true){cout>>techno feudalism.}

Is this some kind of seo thing?

The energy required (in the form of food/cost of living mostly) to collect and connect old calculator solar cells would enormously exceed the cost of new cells.

For decades, India's call centres stood as the tired cliche of globalization: cheap voices on bad connections reading from scripts. But global capital has turned, and irony has a long memory. As AIs battle humans for dominance, Indian customer service might become the best in the world. A strange inversion begins. What used to feel inefficient now feels alive. The hesitations, the small talk, the accents once mocked all become proof that someone real is listening. Machines will solve your problem instantly, but they will never sound tired, kind, or quietly amused at your bad day. I forsee a company advertising, "100% Indian customer service!"