Genady

No, I would not, because there is no logical relation between us building AI and the history of life on Earth.

This is not so strange. These animals evolved big bellies in order to have room for a lot of low energy food. Rather than they have big bellies from eating this food.

This is what stops Google from releasing its chatbot now: Google execs warn of reputational risk with ChatGPT-like tool (cnbc.com)

A sofisticated bs generator. With a right training could replace Deepak Chopra.

Then learn. What stops you?

I can't know any of this because both beer and cheese give me terrible headache. I had any of them last time many years ago.

They do. They do! Lots of Dutch around here. No 'typical European physique'. Many thin and toll. Consume a lot of beer and cheese.

Some people I know would say, But I ask about FOOD...

Right. Such misspelling is natural for a person whose first language is Russian. Thank you.

Just my 5 cents. Where I live, locals have a neat trick which goes a long way in helping to keep conversations polite. They avoid using a singular 'you' as much as possible. This trick helps to talk about a message rather than a person, makes it difficult to insert insults, etc.

But, it is 'lazer' in Russian...

I don't think the question is, how close is AI to HI (human I) -- it is nowhere close. An interesting question, however, is, how far the imitation can go. Understanding this might help us to understand better ourselves.

As it already writes programs in C++, how about giving it a COBOL tutorial and see if it will write COBOL programs?

Fusion energy breakthrough by US scientists boosts clean power hopes | Financial Times (ft.com)

Since the plasma we're talking about is a state of air, it seems to me that saying, "Lightening is a plasma" is a way of saying, "Lightening is air." I don't think that lightening is air.

(emphasis added )

Lightning is not a plasma. It makes plasma.

This process produces light.

@JustJoe. In case of lightening, it's a process.

No, it is not. It is a phenomenon.

@JustJoe. In the Modern and Theoretical Physics, where this thread is posted, electricity is not a substance.

If each logical step of a derivation is written on a separate line, and preferably numbered, then it is easier to understand and discuss.

Regarding the opening post examples: Null hypothesis: a deviation from an observed characteristic is a fluke, Alternative 1: a deviation is caused by population characteristic being greater than observed characteristic., etc.

Not so. A god-like observer must rather conclude that particle falls into the event horizon in one reference frame and doesn't fall into it in another reference frame. No contradiction.

An alternative hypothesis explains something as cause and effect, while a null hypothesis explains it as a statistical fluke.