It's not that it's fake. It's that most work is predictable.

...pfft, folks, I'm still getting my head around the notion of $50k vehicles being a commonplace thing. I make a pretty decent living and yet I've never spent more than $32k for a car, nor do I plan to.

"It's not fair to the slower technologies?" Really, FFS?

"...considering that the goal is not required by the statute and does not serve any positive purpose..."

Does not serve any positive purpose? Positive purpose must mean making him money personally.

Except we aren't talking about a mere definition of broadband, nor do we care what your data rate requirements are.

Right, stellar fusion relies on extreme gravity to overcome Coulomb repulsion. We don't have that on earth, so we have to use thermal kinetic energy instead.

"I think it is fundamentally a crisis of trust," Amodei said. "I think that ordinary people don't trust companies, governments, or the tech industry and always suspect that we are cooking up some new way to screw them over."

What insight. Could it be because that's exactly what happens? Capitalism is literally defined by this. And no, public distrust isn't because of "AI leaders" making warnings, it's because of the threat AI poses to people's lives. All of this bullshit pretends that there aren't real facts on the ground, AI is proving what it is, the public has taken notice.

Perhaps learn to get along rather than be racist?

Supply them with what?

"We don't know if AI data centers in space will be important in the future."

No, we do.

I believe the question assumed reality, your answers do not. Why doesn't China just build a fleet of starships instead?

"Anything that isn't already open source can have an AI replacement coded in hours now. "

False. The vast majority of software is embedded, that software cannot be replaced in hours. It would take longer to just communicate the platform information needed to begin.

All software that is shit can replaced in hours. Seems like the only software /. posters know.

It's not money, it never existed so it didn't have to disappear.

Searching the flock database should require a warrant signed by an actual judge in the actual jurisdiction where the crime in question is alleged to have taken place, and in the actual court that would hear the case. No forum shopping for friendly judges with rubber stamp warrant policies.

You entirely missed the most egregious error, AI does NOT have "the ability to kill humanity".

Giving software the ability to "kill humanity" is the crime,wiring AI up to it just identifies AI as the particular software. AI is NOT the ability for computers to perform operations, committing murder is one of those potential operations. The backlash AI receives is due to what the AI is wired to do (and how bad it is at doing it), no one dismisses the potential.

And let's be clear, the problem isn't the development of AI, it's the direction that development takes, because of the people in charge, and what the product is intended to do and how it will be autonomously capable of performing those things without regard to consequences. A neural network is interesting, but a neural network does not kill people. A NN is a deterministic piece of software, wiring it to a life support system and then tasking it with deciding whether to unplug or not is NOT AI, it's corporate greed and sociopathy. We need to take AI seriously, and we do, but the people that need to be reined in are those spewing this stupid shit.