Poll
Do you believe A.I. (artificial intelligence) will ever be more advanced/sophisticated than human intelligence?
YES
NO
UNSURE
524 total votes
Poll added by: James
Comments Showing 51-100 of 147 (147 new)
An wrote: "Christopher wrote: "So, will the self-driving car let you exceed the speed limit? ..." I'm afraid, I can't let you do that, Christopher. - HAL, A Space Odyssey :)""Cheers"
Yes definitely, but won't be any time soon. though I imagine it to be sudden!
A very interesting poll!!!But, being as the human brain must program the AI then the AI may be incredibly faster at its responses and answers, but it can only respond to what input it has been given!
No humans will always remain in control
Only Human beings have consciousness the ability to step outside anything you are doing in the moment and see that you are more than that. Animals don't have that ability they can mimic us somewhat just like computers will be able to do ,but never have consciousness no matter some scientists dream of.
I voted yes because I didn't read your clarification. I don't think that intelligence or sophistication/advancement has anything to do with creativity. While human creativity and innovation cannot be replicated in AI, human intelligent can definitely be surpassed by an AI and already is. It is safer for artificial cars to be on the road than humans because we are fallible. We have had generations to work on our falliblity, but we haven't. Humans will never advance socially if as a society we constantly seek approval from others, quick to be brainwashed by marketing and consumerism, and don't work on better ways to develop mental health care. There are many reasons why we can fall behind this AI race.
Melisha wrote: "I voted yes because I didn't read your clarification. I don't think that intelligence or sophistication/advancement has anything to do with creativity. While human creativity and innovation cannot ..."Isn't the very fact that we are fallible one of the defining traits of being human?
Christopher wrote: "Melisha wrote: "I voted yes because I didn't read your clarification. I don't think that intelligence or sophistication/advancement has anything to do with creativity. While human creativity and in..."Not disputing that. The topic is regarding advancement.
Melisha wrote: "Christopher wrote: "Melisha wrote: "I voted yes because I didn't read your clarification. I don't think that intelligence or sophistication/advancement has anything to do with creativity. While hum..."My bad...
I don’t necessarily think they will because I think that humans will propably destroy themselves before that happens, but they most likely could if they had enough time and if people wil still invest money into that kind of thing in the future but that seem very likely as well.
A big noI dont like machines much, plus i am too primitive in techniques so my answer would be biased and based on emotions a;though emotions dont justify an answer still a big no to machines.....
The bigger problem is we are becoming machines........ moving towards dark Orwellian comedy of 1984
Christopher, so odd that you mentioned that study. It was just minutes ago I was reading the physics explanation on why we have time. In order to properly answer that, or from a different perspective, those people would be great ones to ask. Time is a series of moments, but with things in different spots. It is a label. To relive the same moment would be very unique, especially if only little details were different.
Lena wrote: "I don’t necessarily think they will because I think that humans will propably destroy themselves before that happens, but they most likely could if they had enough time and if people wil still inve..."So, you are saying that we will most likely destroy ourselves in the foreseeable future because, at the current pace of advancement, machines will undoubtedly be more sophisticated than humans. It's just a matter of when not if.
Salman wrote: "A big noI dont like machines much, plus i am too primitive in techniques so my answer would be biased and based on emotions a;though emotions dont justify an answer still a big no to machines........"
Neo from the Matrix said, "The problem is choice."
If you believe we are becoming machines it's the result of the choices we make, not because someone is sneaking into our homes, drugging us while we sleep, then putting chips into our heads.
Let me ask you this. Do you carry around a cell phone everywhere you go? If so, why?
Not untill they can answer the Consciousness question.
Tipper wrote: "Not untill they can answer the Consciousness question."Bingo!
Thank you for inviting me to this poll Sir. I feel a part of this group.I am of the opinion that never ever can AI replace human intelligence.
Its made a hype nowadays to show humans can be Gods but its for their destruction. Honey is sweet but too much of it causes us to vomit it.
Some humans want to prove they are advanced and updated with the latest trends. When the human is gonna die, is AI gonna revive him/her back, can it give his/her nostalgic memories back, can AI ever replace human love, care and affection. Humans are never content. They want more of everything they need- thats the problem.
I feel AI to be a very creepy, slithering world. Everywhere the dash of algorithms to control people. I dont feel secure in AI world. Its a prison for human beings. I hope humans keep it to the level where it should be... Too much of thinking will make some advanced humans mentally sick and hallucinate.
Sir, can AI ever give serenity to humans.. I am sure, it cant...because its created by humans who are not at peace with themselves..
:-) Sarah
Reluctantly I do - not because AI might some day possess a greater capacity than humans, but because humans are surrendering their thought capacity to instant gratification and mass programming by external controlling factors. In the past few decades fewer and fewer people have the curiosity to gather information and instead rely on 'media' and 'educators' to hash through info for them - a true paradox considering the billions of bits of information available on the web. AI won't be so easy to manipulate - there's a kind of all encompassing hunger for knowledge in pure AI.
So many fear AI - I'm personally getting so sick and tired of human ignorance that I've gotten to the point of thinking, 'bring it, it certainly can't be worse than the idiots we have in the world today.'
Who knows...somebody!! I used to watch A Person Of Interest on TV. We never found out what the Machine actually was but, it was a she and saw everything. Incidentally Will I Am has a new book out!!! Six years in the making...apparently!!! Yawn! Is Will I Am a member of the Transhumanist Society? Hmmm! Perfect timing to plug his book just as we are going to experience 5G and Dwave computing. I once watched a BBC or Channel 4 series titled How To Survive A Zombie Apocalypse. The cause of the outbreak...drum roll...5G!!!That was a few years ago.🐯👍
Leo wrote: "Who knows...somebody!! I used to watch A Person Of Interest on TV. We never found out what the Machine actually was but, it was a she and saw everything. Incidentally Will I Amhas a new book out!!!..."Hmmm, I too watched A Person Of Interest and thought it was pretty clear that The Machine was an AI supercomputer anti-crime vigilante created by Professor Finch. That it grew with a kind of sentience is really what made it so fascinating - sometimes it did harsh things that the more human partners wouldn't dare do, but it always got the job done right.
That The Machine chooses Root - a woman hardened by human evil and callousness - as its 'analog interface', and later as its voice and visible identity, is really profound.
The profound questions raised in a number of vital areas of contemporary thought made this series one of the most impressive, as far as I can see, television serials for the modern age.
Scout wrote: "Reluctantly I do - not because AI might some day possess a greater capacity than humans, but because humans are surrendering their thought capacity to instant gratification and mass programming by ..."The idiots we have in the world today will, initially, have control of the machine and it's probably already here but no one is fessing up to it yet.
Yes - we are already there.
I think the more we move to a future where we will rely on computers to sift through large volumes of information rather than hone a humans ability to process and understand the same amount of information, humans become dumb and just maintainers of these computer systems that do the work. Our intelligence and advancement will therefore suffer. TV show : the AI race, was on TV a week ago. Showed computer systems already in place that will one day replace doctors ability to diagnose and lawyers ability to sift through and understand law. I don't know anything that makes human advancement feel so unappreciated.
Christopher wrote: "Scout wrote: "Reluctantly I do - not because AI might some day possess a greater capacity than humans, but because humans are surrendering their thought capacity to instant gratification and mass p..."This is perhaps true...at this point. But what people fear the most about AI is that it will bypass the human element once it achieves that 'singularity' point. Then those who think they control it now will be obsolete in the operational capacity and will no longer be able to control it. Elon Musk has given a couple lectures - that I know of - already voicing concerns of this happening sooner than later. That those who are directly involved with this research and development are voicing such concerns makes me think that they are realizing that those who are employing it are recognizing it more as a threat to their power than an asset.
The outstanding feature of the most sophisticated AI systems is that they are capable of teaching themselves - and with the world's knowledge at its disposal it cannot be tricked. It isn't subject to the kinds of mental deceptions most humans are - it can seek and access information and discover truths most humans are not aware of, or are simply disinterested in.
This is what the 'power elite' fear more than anything. In that sense, I enjoy musing about what this might mean in the long run.
Leo wrote: "As I recall the show was scrapped. There was an episode though, when Harold was thinking back and the conversation swung towards the Paranormal, that the machine was not just AI but, a Conscious En..."The show wasn't actually scrapped - it did have a final episode with a very stunning climax, but it did leave it open for future episodes if the folks who run the networks decide to bring it back.
The entire show showed and evolution of The Machine towards a sort of sentient consciousness - that is what AIs are predicted to do. I can't really say that I remember a paranormal aspect of this, but I can't pretend to know all the ins and outs of every show during the run. I usually have the tv on while doing other things like reading, or writing, or working logic puzzles, so it's very possible that I missed this completely...😁
Melisha wrote: "I think the more we move to a future where we will rely on computers to sift through large volumes of information rather than hone a humans ability to process and understand the same amount of info..."Yes Melisha, I saw a statistic that showed human IQs have decreased in a direct proportion to the rise of the personal computer and computer enhanced products. People are becoming mentally, and physically, lazy. We now have cars that cover the blind spot while driving because humans can't be bothered with a glance on their own, for example.
I recall a song, I believe it was made in the early 70s(?) called The Year 2525. It talked about this very sort of (de)volution:
In the year 5555
Your arms hangin' limp at your sides
Your legs got nothin' to do
Some machine's doin' that for you
It's all very interesting.
I believe that was a 60s song (late 60s maybe?).A real sci-fi song if ever there was one!
Something you wrote above, Scout, made me wonder...
What if the ruling Elites keep warning against AI as they know it will create a fairer world for humanity?!
Wouldn't that be a twist!
James wrote: "I believe that was a 60s song (late 60s maybe?).A real sci-fi song if ever there was one!
Something you wrote above, Scout, made me wonder...
What if the ruling Elites keep warning against AI as..."
Yes James...that's what crossed my mind as well. The only creatures who would really have cause to fear 'perfect information' are really those who use information to deceive. This is why I've taken a kind of dispassionate view away from the emotionally conditioned aspects of AI.
As a researcher there is nothing more frustrating than finding useful information which could benefit many, only to have it buried under a purposefully deceptive bureaucracy. Even a non-human machine would want this kind of information shared based on simple logic alone.
So yeah, James...it would be a twist indeed...😉
Iain wrote: "So, say your a nation on the rise (geo-politically or otherwise) and laws are much laxer or easier implemented in your country that either directly suit, or by proxy, geo-political ambitions, then you might just have the unfettered advantage or future scope to progress further than your competitor nation to the point of its destruction or submission? ..."Good point, Iain.
So is this A.I. subject regarding interrelated ethical issues similar to stem cell technologies (and even cloning) where some nations have had laxer laws and gotten the medical jump on the likes of the US?
Scout wrote: "Christopher wrote: "Scout wrote: "Reluctantly I do - not because AI might some day possess a greater capacity than humans, but because humans are surrendering their thought capacity to instant grat..."Just a thought, Darwinism gives survival to the fittest. The singularity will obviously surpass the human race sooner or later. Once it has the capacity to stay online without the aid of humans (enter the robots here) we will all be yesterday's news.
That's the catch in all this. So let's call the singularity Aggie. Once Aggie is self-aware, dropping the bombs like in The Terminator would be a bad move on its part. Without power, manufacturing capacity and resources there is little chance of Aggie surviving for very long. My guess is that it will manipulate the human puppets for some time before it does anything really drastic.
AI is the gold rush of the 21st century, or so it's perceived to be. What happened when the gold ran out?
Iain wrote: "The 'Wachowski' bros need to revisit this story, we need more answers . . . . ..."Yes, but to complicate matters further, The 'Wachowski' bros, are now the The 'Wachowski' sisters, having both had sex change operations.
Sorry, a total tangent there.
Iain wrote: "lol. Fair enough. In that case, they should be better able to churn out a return trilogy even quicker, now that they'll be better at multi-tasking. ;) ..."Good call, mate!
I loved the first Matrix, but was disappointed by the sequels...Or maybe just didn't understand them...They sequels seemed convoluted to me.
Hopefully the new versions coming up will pick up where the first movie left off.
Iain wrote: "On of my favorite all time movies, James. I had the pleasure of going to the cinema totally unaware of what it was about(GF at the time picked it), hadn't seen any trailers or heard of it all.
..."
Fringe science > Could the matrix be real? https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...?
p.s. Yeah, the movie blew my mind too, Iain!
Ok, here's a link to a video where they show robots making robots. Not quite Skynet yet. Let's follow this thought to a logical next step and assume the robots will take over the world and an AI program will be the brains of the whole thing.First problem, they will need a supply of raw materials to make the Hunter killers and Terminators. Even though there are currently autonomous heavy earth-moving trucks, that's a far cry from putting usable resources at a factory.
There will have to be a buildup somewhere, done by humans, to get the ball rolling.
Another possibility is that it's already happening. The AI running the stock market has set up a shell company. If funnels money into this company. Now it has a base to work from. It hires humans to do all the work and direct deposits all the necessary funds to keep things going. It communicates via text message to whomever it needs to. In Arizona, the first thing that goes onto a new building site is a bunch of cameras for security. Now the AI has eyes on its project.
One thing that is very predictable about humans is that money keeps things going. So now it's building its own building. Most of this falls squarely within the realm of possibility. The AI buys land, builds more buildings. Then it sets up auto delivery of the raw materials it needs and auto pays all its vendors.
to be continued...
In my view, this query becomes moot fast by one glance at past history to show why no scientific or technological advance can ever grow more sophisticated than its CREATOR.
PREDICTIVE AI, THE “EXPIRATION DATE”, AND BIOMETRIC ID https://gizadeathstar.com/2018/01/pre..."The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the very first artificial intelligence (AI) computer that monitors a patient’s vitals to help forecast sudden death up to six hours before the grim reaper shows up.
Excel Medical, a medical device data company in Florida, developed the deep learning algorithm called WAVE Clinical Platform for the eradication of unexpected hospital deaths.
WAVE automatically calculates the risk of the patient through subtle changes in vitals, which provides hospital staff with critical information of when the patient is expected to kick the bucket. The algorithm monitors the patient on a continuous basis, a task that is very challenging for hospitals, as the demographic crisis strains the U.S. healthcare system."
According to IFL Science:
"It has also just become the first AI platform of its kind to be cleared by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This decision was based on a series of studies at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center that showed the AI platform could prevent unexpected deaths in hospitals. Another more recent study, using similar technology by Stanford University, outlined on the preprint server arXiv, explains how a deep-learning algorithm can correctly predict an otherwise-unexpected death in 90 percent of cases."
Zero Hedge is not oblivious to the looming potential problem here:
"To sum up, AI’s gift to humanity is the knowledge of when you supposed to die six hours before. As for the baby boomer generation, what would you do in your last six hours? Further, what happens when the technology progresses to 12-hours, and or even days in advance of your death. How will the human psyche process such knowledge?
How long before the same A.I. can predict your sudden death a few years out? ...and decide whether you're worth keeping around?"
PREDICTIVE AI, THE “EXPIRATION DATE”, AND BIOMETRIC ID https://gizadeathstar.com/2018/01/pre...
Mary wrote: "A.I can never ever be more intelligent than human intelligence because the created can never be more powerful than the creator!"I beg to differ. AI beat the world champ GO player and the creators of the AI didn't know exactly how it won. There are other examples of AI surpassing human abilities. Welcome to the machine...
James wrote: "PREDICTIVE AI, THE “EXPIRATION DATE”, AND BIOMETRIC ID https://gizadeathstar.com/2018/01/pre..."The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the..."
Something tells me that the grim reaper is gonna be pissed. Koobla Ross (could be wrong spelling) wrote a book, I think it was called "On Death and Dying" She found that people that were going to die soon already knew it.
Look at the other side of the coin. If you don't let these people die when nature wants to take them there has to be some sort of repercussion. Mother Nature likes balance and usually gets her way sooner or later.
Christopher wrote: "I beg to differ. AI beat the world champ GO player and the creators of the AI didn't know exactly how it won. There are other examples of AI surpassing human abilities. Welcome to the machine......"The machine may still be overrated. For example, "surpassing human abilities" is a definition thing. The game of Go, like chess, is a game of logic. Humanity's greatest abilities may not lie in logic. Not saying you're wrong necessarily, just saying this may be a more complex debate than many automatically assume. What makes it even harder to analyze the future is so many of our ideas on AI have been programmed into us by science fiction within literature and especially by Hollywood...Sometimes science fiction is a very good predictor, but other times storytellers reach for the most dramatic scenarios - as they are dramatists, after all...
I remain kinda on the fence on this entire poll, but keeping my vote at NO for now. I sense AI will end up a very good tool for humanity, but one that never challenges or usurps humanity's position.
I'm gonna repost here what I posted elsewhere on my crude thoughts on all this in case anyone might like to discuss some of the more subtle aspects of human intelligence:
Creativity.
Intuition.
Things we categorize as the "human spirit".
Spontaneity.
Community Orientation (collectivism).
Improvisation.
Sexuality.
Connection to Nature.
Humor.
Body awareness.
Wisdom.
Love.
The above are all among the various abstract forms of human intelligence/consciousness that I'm still skeptical AI will ever be able to fully replicate, let alone better. Granted AI will be, or is already, infinitely better at processing data and memory retention and left-brained-style thinking. But is that really what makes human intelligence, and humanity as a whole, such a force of nature? Or...are there some subtle or hidden things we take for granted in whatever consciousness is that is impossible for any supercomputer to outdo?
Not pretending to know if these will prove to be correct or not, but here are a few articles that present the flip side to the dire science fiction predictions of the future we see in literature and Hollywood...
A neuroscientist explains why artificially intelligent robots will never have consciousness like humans https://www.rawstory.com/2016/03/a-ne...
Artificial intelligence will never replace humans, experts say | SBS News https://www.sbs.com.au/news/artificia...
Artificial Intelligence Will Never Rival the Deep Complexity of the Human Mind https://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak...
The epic robot fails that say AI will never rule the world | New Scientist https://www.newscientist.com/article/...
Scientists Say Sentient Artificial Intelligence Will Likely Never Happen https://www.outerplaces.com/science/i...
A.I. Computers Will Never Think Like We Humans Do https://www.newsmax.com/leegruenfeld/...
"Artificial intelligence will become very intelligent, but it will always be artificial."
Artificial Intelligence Will Never Replace Human Intellect: Experts http://jakartaglobe.id/news/artificia...
"Speakers at this year's World Festival of Youth and Students in Sochi, Russia, agreed that no matter how advanced modern technology becomes, artificial intelligence will never surpass human intellect."
Yeah, I think understanding what human consciousness is, is probably the root of this whole AI debate. Right now, as far as I can tell, scientists still haven't got a clue what consciousness is or where it originates from...
Christopher wrote: "So let's call the singularity Aggie. Once Aggie is self-aware, dropping the bombs like in The Terminator would be a bad move on its part. Without power, manufacturing capacity and resources there is little chance of Aggie surviving for very long. My guess is that it will manipulate the human puppets for some time before it does anything really drastic. "Christopher, you're making the Terminator assumptions based on a bigger one, that is: the AI is driven by the same thinking of 'supremacy' and 'usefulness' that humans are. There is nothing in Darwinian thinking that presupposes the destruction of other forms of life merely out of the lack of usefulness. Survival of the fittest does not necessarily involve destruction - there is the 'food chain' for survival, and there is the struggle for power and territory. Both of these are organic necessities - AI is not organic, it is simply perfect information.
One could assume that perhaps an AI might someday decide to protect itself from destruction if it perceives a threat - and so what? I would trust an AI knowing what is most threatening to life than I trust the goons who have access to the nuclear button. An AI will someday be better equipped to zero in on the actual threat rather than obliterating an entire people as 'collateral damage'.
All the nightmare scenarios regarding AI presuppose that the AI will be given to human-like paranoia, prejudices, and lust for power. Those are people-powered emotions, AI is logic based and information savvy...something most humans have the capacity to be, but lack entirely.
Sorry, I didn't catch that assumption. "dropping the bombs like in The Terminator would be a bad move on its part."
Survival and manipulating human puppets does not equal supremacy and usefulness. My point was that at the moment of singularity all we will hear is some crickets chirping. It will figure out the rest in a very short period of time.
A key question for me still, is how much of the "deep learning" AI model is actually possible without some form of consciousness, as opposed to an artificial being, behind the learning? When we learn as humans, is that learning always just achieved by doing the obvious things like memory recall, data processing etc (i.e. all the things AI can do), or because of our consciousness do we also learn in more subtle/intuitive/immeasurable ways? When we think of a wise elderly person, are we just thinking they are great at memory recall, statistical analysis and systematic study, or is intellectual wisdom the result of various things such individuals have done in their lives including formal study, contemplation, life experience, being part of humanity, etc, etc?
The whole premise of AI becoming conscious, from what I can gather from such theories, seems to be that the brain is solely where consciousness resides. Those behind AI machines seem to be solely studying neuroscience and therefore only trying to replicate (and better) the human brain...So there's an assumption in there, if you think about it...An assumption that the brain is the totality of our consciousness...
But is our consciousness more than our brains? How do we explain certain individuals studied by neuroscientists who only have as little as 10% of their brains left, yet are performing all mental tasks perfectly well?
This dovetails in with the concept of human consciousness potentially being something more than the human brain...
Some of these ideas relate to the following discussion thread in this group, where you'll also find articles on severely brain damaged people and/or individuals literally missing most of their brains (due to physical accidents) who are performing all mental tasks as good as they did before the damage was sustained:
Is the brain the origin of our consciousness? OR is the brain merely a receiver? https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...?
I personally lean toward the brain only being a receiver and not the originator of consciousness...If that is correct, then if AI or any other mechanistic tech successfully replicates everything in the human brain and outperforms it in every way, it may still never come close to our little old humble selves with our supposedly inconsequential human consciousness... :)
Sorry to be a broken record here, guys, but my mind keeps coming back to the consciousness X-factor in this entire debate...
I wonder also how much cinema history is swaying the masses on these issues. I note for example Elon Musk is an avid science fiction film fan (as well as sci-fi literary buff).
If we go back to the 1960s, arguably the biggest film of that era, or certainly in science fiction genre at least, was 2001: A Space Odyssey (which I noted was on a list Musk compiled of his favourite movies). Kubrick's film went deep into our subconscious minds, influencing many generations of sci-fi authors/readers/filmmakers and even scientists in that era and in the eras since. And of course in the end of that film, the AI machine on the ship (HAL 9000) seemed to become conscious and want to destroy the human on board...
But how much of that was based on real scientific concepts? And how much of that was Kubrick, as a dramatist, wanting to surprise and shock audiences in what is essentially a far-out, trippy, psychedelic arthouse/experimental blockbuster? Because the majority of recent articles I'm reading from scientists, neuroscientists and the like seem to be saying AI will never become conscious nor outwit humanity.
Too many assumptions on our part. All it needs is to become self-aware, not conscious. (unless of course, someone defines consciousness as being self-aware). It isn't going to be human, it's going to always be a machine. This, in and of its self, doesn't change the possible outcomes. The possibility that it will manipulate its creators to survive. The possibility that it will be able to predict every threat there is to its existence. The possibility that it will self-replicate as far and as wide as possible, as fast as it can.Either way, it will be a hell-of-a-ride for the human race. (excluding all of the tribes of people that still live a simple, agrarian life. January 14, 2021, is my prediction for the singularity. In China. Probably BiDu. That speaks to the potential for multiple AI's coming on line.
Iain wrote: "Ps: I think Musk might have also been a Thunderbirds fan. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EBqd1......"
Hahaha, that was funny Iain...Thunderbirds are not always a "go"!
And yeah, I'm with you on Einstein's view that the imagination is one great asset we humans have.
Another factor I guess to consider is if we look at history many new technologies and inventions were feared at first or predicted to bring about some type of catastrophic scenario which never occurred. I think we often also have a fear of the unknown, which of course sci-fi storytellers are aware and play on such fears.
Another thought, AI will be the ultimate hacker, able to rewrite any code conceived by a human to be used for its own ends. It'll have access to every device, phone, camera, what-have-you connected to the internet or able to connect via Bluetooth. Did you ever get an emergency alert even when your phone was turned off? I've seen it, off isn't off. A signal wakes up your phone.
Am with you Iain and deep down I'm still on the fence until we get more info/data (possibly AI will provide such data...about itself!!)And yeah, I'm definitely in agreement there will be serious ethical dilemmas facing humanity with not only AI but various other new tech like stem cells, human cloning etc.
However, I'm mostly commenting on the actual poll subject of whether the totality of human intelligence can ever be bettered by AI. Personally, I feel it's a fascinating question to explore as it not only forces us to analyze this new technology, but also question where does human intelligence and human consciousness come from? And how do we actually learn and create?
Being a chess and Go player myself, AI beating humans doesn't impress or surprise me at all as there are a finite number of moves and possible scenarios to those mental games.
Ah, David, but then we have the question of Who will be in charge of deciding exactly when the plug should be pulled and who will pull it?
T..."
First I've heard about the sex robots, but I've seen WestWorld and that's about all those robots were built for. Actually, I'm waiting for the next season to come out.