The term "Artificial Intelligence" has taken root and become popular over more than half a century
That is a proof that AI exists? How strange… You are not serious.
Oh, of course, machines, whether smart or dumb, can replace human labor.
You’ve again conveniently missed the point: They can’t at the same or better price. That was what Marx has proven without doubt. And that is proven in the latest scandal:
The coronavirus is a real virus, verifiable by any competent laboratory. Don't you have a relative who studied microbiology? A lab analyst?
I have almost 400 texts where I fully documented the hoax: Virus was never isolated. No laboratory has ever show any live SarsCov virus. They are talkig ‘computer model’ only. You are repeating media nonsense, and think you are right. You have professors of microbiology, like former Paul Erlich Institute head prof. dr. Sucharit Bhagdi, and late professor and Nobel prize winner Luc Montagnier. You should know what are you talking about. You should know better than propaganda.
And you are not.
You are the one asserting that AI does not exist. AI is a well-established field in science and engineering, and you are claiming its non-existence. Therefore, I only need to demonstrate that your claim is incorrect. That's the essence of logical and scientific argumentation. I have already discussed what is considered to be AI in my previous posts. If you are suggesting that I haven't made a case, then you should review those posts and address the claims made there.
Your primary assertion is that AI does not exist. You are the one who diverts the topic by linking supposedly unethical corporate behavior and market processes with the mere existence of AI, whether as a field of science and engineering, as a process, or as a product. This is a common reason why conspiracy theories often fail; they are built on multiple premises that conflate unrelated events, making the theory increasingly improbable. Unfortunately, conspiracy theorists tend to disregard the principles of logic.
Even if I conceded that certain companies have engaged in abusive behavior, slavery, and the like, and that this is well explained by a particular economic theory, and that it renders capitalism malevolent, it does not imply that the entire endeavor of AI is a hoax. If your argument were different, for instance, that some companies exploit AI hype to make unscrupulous offers, then I might agree that your Amazon story could serve as evidence for that argument. However, you cannot judge such an ambitious theory as the non-existence of AI based on isolated incidents. In other words, you cannot dismiss the hundreds of stories that provide evidence for the existence of AI and focus solely on the ones that support your incredulous viewpoint.
This is incorrect. SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated by scientists globally since early 2020. You can easily check the abundant specialized research and literature on the topic.
No, I am not. I am referring to scientific papers on the topic. Please review the query I provided in the previous paragraph for more information.
It's important to be specific about the statements attributed to Luc Montagnier, as conspiracy theorists have attributed various unfounded claims to him. While being a Nobel laureate is great, it does not prevent one from making incorrect or controversial statements. The claims he made about the coronavirus and vaccines have been debunked by the scientific community. He did not publish a peer-reviewed paper on the subject, nor has he provided any verifiable evidence. An appeal to authority is not sufficient; you need credible evidence that can be verified by competent authorities.