2 hours ago, swansont said:

Not even everyone on this site agrees.

swansont, so what? This is kitchen talk.

You wrote:

You are free to decide the earth is ~10k years old. Nobody is stopping you.

And you are free to disagree that intelligence can be artificial, etc. Nobody is stopping you. That's why i say that you don't have a right to complain. You have just closed that topic, and said that Sensei need help. No. His thinking is a product of "we are animals". Programmers think they have "created" kind of a soul. So why can't we think that these artificial robots and programs are a part of evolution? Evolutionary stage? Evolution is a change, not development, don't forget.

3D printers print organs. Folks wonder about artificial brain, and about artificial human beings. And it doesn't matter what is happening with these programs. If someone decides that artificial consciousness is here, we will get it.

I only think, that artificial "intelligence" will help people to understand what it means to be man. Not an animal, not species, not human, not human being, but man. I hope it won't be too late.

2 minutes ago, m_m said:

And you are free to disagree that intelligence can be artificial, etc. Nobody is stopping you.

The proponents ao AI act like it’s a religion, as does the conversation that Sensei posted (“mention of a “belief” in AI)

The empirical evidence says otherwise.

2 minutes ago, m_m said:

That's why i say that you don't have a right to complain. You have just closed that topic, and said that Sensei need help. No.

The topic was closed owing to rules violations. The help suggestion is from treating AI like it was an actual person.

2 minutes ago, m_m said:

His thinking is a product of "we are animals". Programmers think they have "created" kind of a soul. So why can't we think that these artificial robots and programs are a part of evolution? Evolutionary stage? Evolution is a change, not development, don't forget.

Biological evolution is genetic change. The evolution of technology is not that; there are distinct differences that render the analogy incorrect.

2 minutes ago, m_m said:

3D printers print organs. Folks wonder about artificial brain, and about artificial human beings. And it doesn't matter what is happening with these programs. If someone decides that artificial consciousness is here, we will get it.

It’s not a matter of “someone decides”

It’s what can be objectively demonstrated

2 minutes ago, m_m said:

I only think, that artificial "intelligence" will help people to understand what it means to be man. Not an animal, not species, not human, not human being, but man. I hope it won't be too late

“man” refers to humans, which are animals. Objective scientific fact.

You can hang onto blissful ignorance, but this is an odd place to do so.

Such words like "man" ,"mankind", "people" have disappeared from English, there are human beings and humans. And it seems to me, that the word human distinguishes people like species among other ones. So why can't we think of A"I" as of other species? The Kingdom of Computers? I think it is compatible with evolution. Because this term has a broad sense and it refers not only to biology. Who cares about biology? You? So what?

These programs are everywhere already. As for me, it's time for them to have responsibility, isn't it?

Responsibility?

I work for a finance company, and use certain AIs to get some coding tasks done faster.

If we leak customer private details, or charge them too much, etc, Government regulators come and stomp on us.

And if the problem was caused by AI generated code, no, the AI takes no responsibility.

It is a company you work for. But there are protests against AI. It steals ideas, information.

5 hours ago, m_m said:

It is a company you work for. But there are protests against AI. It steals ideas, information.

AI doesn't give a shit, it's people that steals information...

I wonder what sort of AI might have been involved this this 1000 time overcharging

Woman charged £4,586 for two-hour car park stay

BBC News

Woman charged £4,586 for two-hour car park stay in Slough

It took three weeks for the mum to receive a refund for the accidental overcharge.

I note that the human organisation failed to correct the error promptly until pushed by the BBC.

2 hours ago, dimreepr said:

AI doesn't give a shit, it's people that steals information...

No, no, no, people wish to transfer their responsibility to machines for all the troubles we have. So, machines must be responsible. I think the law for programs needs to be made up.

19 hours ago, m_m said:

No, no, no, people wish to transfer their responsibility to machines for all the troubles we have. So, machines must be responsible. I think the law for programs needs to be made up.

Isaac Asimov had a go with the three laws of robotics but he had to modify them to include a fourth.

The law's for people using AI is what we need to make up and it'll need many more than four to nail it down properly... 😉