I call the brain “wetware” because there are companies already working with living neurons to be integrated into AI processing, and it’s an actual industry term.

That you so confidently declare machines will never be capable of processes we haven’t even been able to clearly define ourselves, paired with your almost religious fervor in opposition to its existence, really speaks to where you’re coming from on this. This isn’t coming from an academic perspective. This is clearly personal for you.

And there’s the reveal!! That’s why it’s so personal for you! It’s a career threat. It all adds up now.

Dog has a very clear definition, so when you call a sausage in a bun a "Hot Dog", you are actually a fool.

Smart has a very clear definition, so no, you do not have a "Smart Phone" in your pocket.

Also, that is not the definition of intelligence. But the crux of the issue is that you are making up a definition for AI that suits your needs.

Here’s the thing, I’m not against LLMs and dispersion for things they can actually be used for, they have potential for real things, just not at all the things you pretend exist. Neural implants aren’t AI. An intelligence is self aware, if we achieved AI it wouldn’t be a program. You’re misconstruing Virtual Intelligence for artificial intelligence and you don’t even understand what a virtual intelligence is. You’re simply delusional in what you believe computer science and technology is, how it works, and what it’s capable of.

I don’t make money, it’s something I do for personal enjoyment, that’s the entire purpose of art, it’s something I also use algorithmic processing to do. I’m not going to hand over my enjoyment to have a servitor do something for me to take credit for, I prefer to use my brain, not replace it.

I’m not talking about neural interfaces. I’m talking about organiod intelligence.

I am a computer scientist with lab experience in this. I’m not pulling this out of my ass. I’m drawing from direct experience in development.

No one told you to hand it over. A technology being able to do something does not require you to use it. And people misusing the technology to feign talent is a reflection of the people- not the tech.

Yeah, that’s the problem with the field, too many delusional people trying to find god in a computer because they didn’t understand what Asimov was actually writing about.

Wow it's almost like the computer scientists were saying this from the start but were shouted over by marketing teams.

It’s not even to feign talent, it’s people trying to replace the brain instead of using applicable tools to help us advance and progress, you’re just advertising a product.

That it has to be nothing or everything with you, decision trees or God himself, is the likely foundation of your inability to have simple objective take on the existing technology and its capabilities. It’s giving bi-polar.

Now I’m not uninformed- I’m too informed!! LoL. That goalpost just shifted right across the field, and still you cannot admit to your ignorance.

People have been presenting the work of others as their own for all of history. All that changed was a new tool was found to do that. But at least these are a form of derivative works, and not just putting their name directly on someone else’s carbon copy.

You haven’t made any point or even expressed an understanding of how these programs work. You’ve just been evangelizing about how AI is great, I genuinely don’t believe you understand what you’re talking about because you’ve expressed literally no proper understanding or explanation of your points outside of using a scene from I, Robot which kind of makes you look like you entirely misconstrue the concepts you’re sucking the dick of.

What kind of computer sciences do you work with as a profession? What is your applicable lab work?

I’m not evangelizing. You incorrectly stated the limitations and development paths of the tech, and I corrected you.

Again with the religious verbiage from you. But I’m the one proselytizing?

It’s not nothing- it’s an impressive feat of technology that’s still in its infancy. It’s also not everything, and not anywhere close to a reasoning mind at this point. You are obsessive with extremes.

Tell that to Studio Ghibli. Also, people being shitty is not a good excuse for people to be shitty, you’re advocating to make it easier to enable people to be shitty.

You didn’t answer my question. You’ve also still yet to give any details on your reasoning.

Studio Ghibli does not have exclusive rights to their style- whether it’s used by a person or an AI to inspire a new image. Those are derivative works. Totally legal. Arguably ethical. If it’s not a direct copy, how has the studio been harmed? What work of theirs was diminished?

I’m advocating for tools. How people use those tools is on them.

You didn’t answer my question. You’ve also still yet to give any details on your reasoning.

No, I’m not gonna dox myself.

Reasoning for what? What details are you needing for clarification?

Actually, you’re out of your depth, and I think you’ve been outed enough. We’re done, and I’m blocking.