You don't have to like the forecast to track it against the news reports. (Of course, the news reports are often just PR, and you need to weigh that in.)

The brainstem is probably rather invariant between people. That's an area where differences are likely to be fatal.

Actually, we're pretty sure it CAN happen by random chance. The argument is about how small that chance is...and what environmental conditions give the highest probability. And in what order things happened. (Currently I, not really knowledgeable in the field, think metabolism probably came before centralized information storage.)

YES!!
And *part* of the reason it's tricky is that we've got no real idea of what current AIs are going to develop into. Projections are all over the map.

FWIW, I tend to consider the AI2027 projections as identifying the most probably sequence, but there are lots of others, and none of them have any chance of being more than approximately correct. (The AI2027 people say it isn't moving quite as fast as they projected, but when I compare what they said against the news I'm not sure I believe them.)

And the main one should be "Never expose your critical information on the internet, or to any computer connected to the internet.".

That's not sufficient, but it would eliminate most problems.

Actually, I think the federal government has accumulated too much control. I blame the direct election of Senators, but I'm not sure that's totally fair.

A decent point, but somehow this seems a case where Trump actually acted in (in his judgement) the country's best interests. ... And I'm not sure it wasn't in the country's best interests.

It also seems calculated to discriminate against handicapped folks that need mechanized assistance...but I may be wrong.

Sorry, but wrong. Currently AI is often blatantly wrong in ways that people would never be, but most of the time it does a narrowly specified job decently. It's just that when it doesn't, you may REALLY notice it.

No. Saying that the US and various US entities do it does not imply that China and Russia aren't also doing it, and perhaps at greater volume. (Though that last needs at least a bit of evidence.)

OTOH, it's quite plausible that the tactics are more effective in the US than in more tightly controlled environments.

That changed the number of practicing doctors.

Astroturfing is, but definition, and organized activity pretending to not be an organized activity. I've absolutely no reason to believe that various US organizations don't engage in it.

Astroturfing was invented in the US. To claim we don't do it is just silly. (But I would suspect that it might be more companies than the govt.)

I had a sister that lived in South Dakota for awhile. The wild lands were great, but she couldn't find decent friends. She left within a few years, even though she had bought a house because she thought she'd like it. It *wasn't* the climate that drove her away.

Read the post above for an alternative explanation.
It begins: