We have seen a lot of revelotunary new technology that was never adopted, the Concorde first flew in 1969, it was thought that concept would be status quo by now, that didn't happen the 737 still remains the most common concept instead. Many examples of this.

As of now the only AI I have ever used has been in the latest MSFS, it has great benefits in gaming and simulation, but has no benefit in my life on an island in the South Pacific, and probably never will, I will enjoy how it enhance games for me

I asked Google AI ChatGPT "Will AI wipe us out?" and it changed the subject to something completely different. Trying to distract me?

 

I think it was trying to distract me !

They set up a bunch of chess games between modern AI and a 1970s era Atari 2600.  

The Atari won every game.  The AI even asked to restart a few games.  

Right now, AI is mostly hype and not a lot of practical tech.  Again, it will improve over time, but it is a lot farther away than people think.  

I don't mean to be a technology naysayer.  I work in tech and like working with new things.  Remember when blockchain was seemingly going to be used for everything?  These things get over hyped.  AI won't go the way of blockchain and isn't going away, but we're still a long way away from worrying if AI is sentient.  

https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/how-did-chatgpt-get-absolutely-wrecked-at-chess-losing-to-a-1970s-era-atari-2600/

How arrogant as a species we are to assume that we must keep the world at our intelligence level. If we create something, whether accidentally or on-purpose, that can out-perform us, out-think us, out-maneuver us .... why shouldn't it flourish?

We're limited anyway - we take too long to grow, we take too long to learn (and some of us don't reach our full potential and are a drain on humanity from an evolutionary perspective), we can't survive in space, we can't survive long enough to travel to another planetary system.... honestly, AI and mechanical organisms (even hybrids) could simply be evolution of the human race. Survival of the fittest. Our brains are out biggest asset anyway - these meat suits we move around in are decrepit, incapable and vulnerable.

What IS consciousness anyway? We don't even know - so what right do we have to prevent something from out-doing us if it is capable of being infinitely more successful at "living"?

 

(And I, for one, welcome our new AI overlords. I'd like to remind them as a trusted internet personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground lithium caves).

Edited June 17, 2025Jun 17 by FPVSteve

1 hour ago, FPVSteve said:

We're limited anyway - we take too long to grow, we take too long to learn (and some of us don't reach our full potential and are a drain on humanity from an evolutionary perspective), we can't survive in space, we can't survive long enough to travel to another planetary system.... honestly, AI and mechanical organisms (even hybrids) could simply be evolution of the human race. Survival of the fittest. Our brains are out biggest asset anyway - these meat suits we move around in are decrepit, incapable and vulnerable.

Wow, you sure don't appreciate we humans, do you?  Yes, humans are flawed, but so is almost everything else in this wonderful universe.

IMO, the human body and mind are simply miraculous.  We are comprised of *trillions* of literal nano-machines all working tirelessly to keep us going and make repairs for up to 100+ years with only a little water, food, and air.  Just look at what these "meat suits" have been able to accomplish throughout history.  We've done some pretty awful things as well, but who's to say that truly sentient AI robots wouldn't end up having similar flaws such as jealousy, envy, and greed?

Current computing power and AI is not even close to that of the human brain.  I am amused when I read these silly articles or watch a Youtube video claiming that AI will "take over the world" since it is so superior to humans.  Please.  Yes, a computer can calculate things faster, but can it create a philosophy or a beautiful piece of art, design and make musical instruments and then compose music for them to play, write stories and then recreate them as plays or movies, etc, etc.?  Can it have an innate curiosity?  Can it have an innate empathy and compassion for other sentient beings?  

An AI robot will also have weaknesses and vulnerabilities.  For instance, it must have electrical power to survive and function, just as we need food.  Its hydraulic and/or electrical servo motors and actuators will need routine maintenance such as adjustment, lubrication, and replacement.  Will its computer chips last forever?  Of course not.  Its components will break down and fail over time. 

The robot does have certain advantages such as the ability to easily replace parts, which also provides for a longer lifespan, but overall can it really be *better* than a human?  I doubt it.

BTW, I'm speaking of the present and near future here, such as the next 50 years.  Who knows what we'll come up with 100 years from now?

Dave    

1 hour ago, dave2013 said:

Current computing power and AI is not even close to that of the human brain.

 

True... but the video explores where it will lead and how long, It's also about AGI and whatever follows. The video is worth watching. I suspect that nobody commenting has taken the time.

You mention the next 50 years, well, at the rate of current advancement, AGI will be old news and we'll be dealing with technology that we can currently barely dream off.

I would say that philosophy and art will be child's play within 50 years, for true AGI, and what follows.

Some are predicting 2030 and some 2040... but AGI timeless are shrinking. 

And even prior to AGI, just considering AI, we can certainly expect a significant impact on society.

 

Artificial general intelligence (AGI) refers to the hypothetical intelligence of a machine that possesses the ability to understand or learn any intellectual task that a human being can. It is a type of artificial intelligence (AI) that aims to mimic the cognitive abilities of the human brain.

 

Edited June 17, 2025Jun 17 by martin-w

5 hours ago, kerosene31 said:

They set up a bunch of chess games between modern AI and a 1970s era Atari 2600.  

The Atari won every game.  The AI even asked to restart a few games.  

 

To you have a link to that? Current chess programs, like Stockfish, beat humans every time. Chess engines are that good. But you say the old chess engine on an Atari beat AI... well what kind of AI software? If it's not trained to play chess it obviously couldn't compete.

 

 

2 hours ago, dave2013 said:

Wow, you sure don't appreciate we humans, do you?  Yes, humans are flawed, but so is almost everything else in this wonderful universe.

IMO, the human body and mind are simply miraculous.  We are comprised of *trillions* of literal nano-machines all working tirelessly to keep us going and make repairs for up to 100+ years with only a little water, food, and air.  Just look at what these "meat suits" have been able to accomplish throughout history.  We've done some pretty awful things as well, but who's to say that truly sentient AI robots wouldn't end up having similar flaws such as jealousy, envy, and greed?

Current computing power and AI is not even close to that of the human brain.  I am amused when I read these silly articles or watch a Youtube video claiming that AI will "take over the world" since it is so superior to humans.  Please.  Yes, a computer can calculate things faster, but can it create a philosophy or a beautiful piece of art, design and make musical instruments and then compose music for them to play, write stories and then recreate them as plays or movies, etc, etc.?  Can it have an innate curiosity?  Can it have an innate empathy and compassion for other sentient beings?  

An AI robot will also have weaknesses and vulnerabilities.  For instance, it must have electrical power to survive and function, just as we need food.  Its hydraulic and/or electrical servo motors and actuators will need routine maintenance such as adjustment, lubrication, and replacement.  Will its computer chips last forever?  Of course not.  Its components will break down and fail over time. 

The robot does have certain advantages such as the ability to easily replace parts, which also provides for a longer lifespan, but overall can it really be *better* than a human?  I doubt it.

BTW, I'm speaking of the present and near future here, such as the next 50 years.  Who knows what we'll come up with 100 years from now?

Dave    

We're capable of great things sure, but we're also capable of being complete idiots since we're at the whim of a hierarchy who doesn't necessarily have the interests of humanity at heart - instead, their own ego-driven goals.

It's the Fermi Paradox, Resolution #2: "Self-Destruction: Advanced civilizations may develop technologies that lead to their own demise, such as advanced weaponry or ecological collapse"

Future intelligence doesn't necessarily mean human intelligence or even a derivative thereof. We may wipe ourselves out, the machines may well die and perhaps Apes will become the dominant species. They will consider their own "maximum" intelligence level as "the" intelligence to strive for in that case. You can't know what you don't know about.

 

Edited June 17, 2025Jun 17 by FPVSteve

1 hour ago, martin-w said:

 

To you have a link to that? Current chess programs, like Stockfish, beat humans every time. Chess engines are that good. But you say the old chess engine on an Atari beat AI... well what kind of AI software? If it's not trained to play chess it obviously couldn't compete.

 

Link is right in my post.

We know that a computer can be made to play chess well.  We've seen computers go up against the chess greats.  There's $10 chess games on Steam with a computer that could embarrass 99% of us.  

The point is that an AI couldn't even learn to play at a beginner level.  It didn't even understand the moves.  We're not talking about beating a master, just playing the game at a very basic level.  It should be a fairly simple problem for AI handle.  I can teach my 9 year old nephew to play chess in 30 minutes at a basic level.  

The point is that the hype is way beyond what the tech is generally able to do.  

Edited June 17, 2025Jun 17 by kerosene31

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/technology/amazon-boss-tells-staff-ai-means-their-jobs-are-at-risk-in-coming-years/ar-AA1GWbve

On 6/17/2025 at 6:33 PM, kerosene31 said:

Link is right in my post.

 

Yes, as I thought. ChatGPT wasn't coded properly for chess. It missed obvious forks and confused rooks with bishops. 

As the article said... it can beat ChatGPT "under the right conditions". Those conditions being if ChatGPT (that isn't designed for chess) is compromised by not understanding the rules properly and/or not being observant enough.

Now code an AI specifically for chess and the result is different. Ask an Atari chess engine to do what ChatGPT does and it will obviously  totally fail.

If you want to test AI against an Atari then it's the  AI chess engine Stockfish you want.... so no, implying AI can't play chess better than an Atari is utterly wrong. Stockfish can beat any human and obviously out class a simple Atari chess engine by a million miles.

Edited June 18, 2025Jun 18 by martin-w

On 6/17/2025 at 6:33 PM, kerosene31 said:

 

The point is that an AI couldn't even learn to play at a beginner level.  It didn't even understand the moves.  We're not talking about beating a master, just playing the game at a very basic level.  

 

 

Wrong... Stockfish, the AI chess engine does far more than play at a beginner level.... it's the best chess engine. It's virtually unbeatable, by a human. 

 

Yes, Stockfish "teaches" itself to play chess through self-play and reinforcement learning. It plays millions of games against itself, using the results to refine its evaluation function and improve its gameplay. 

3 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

Wrong... Stockfish, the AI chess engine does far more than play at a beginner level.... it's the best chess engine. It's virtually unbeatable, by a human. 

 

Yes, Stockfish "teaches" itself to play chess through self-play and reinforcement learning. It plays millions of games against itself, using the results to refine its evaluation function and improve its gameplay. 

Repeating everything I said to call me wrong.  Whatever works for you.  Take your issues up with the author of the article.  

9 hours ago, kerosene31 said:

Repeating everything I said to call me wrong.  Whatever works for you.  Take your issues up with the author of the article.  

 

Actually, you used the fact that an Atari beat an AI at chess to bolster your claim that AI is all hype.

I simply pointed out that it isn't true that AI can't beat a simple outdated Atari chess engine... as Stockfish in an AI chess engine and undefeatable by human or an outdated Atari.

AI may be all hype... but you'll need better evidence.