Oh, I am in good company with my approach as it's not my property alone.
My approach was focusing sharply on the single sentence I quoted from you, nothing more.
Though I know that AI is replacing humans in "many aspects" they won't replace them in precisely that aspect I talked about. ... Why would I want that, I wonder ... ? Do you want that?
... I prefer to talk to humans from flesh and blood to practice my social behavior. The biggest gain is always perceived from me when I listen to real life experiences and withdraw something from a personal story which came out of a mouth of another human I could observe also in his body language while he or she talked about this experience. Flesh and spirit are interconnected. How on earth should an AI deliver such thing ... ?
Cannot agree more with you on this one !
But sadly, there are people who don't think this way and try to create something which they don't understand.
You see, the paradox is that humans try to recreate human behaviour without understanding what it actually is. Having this said, I also don't think that we as species would be able to fully recreate AI, which will absolutely replace us, as we exist. But that does not mean that we won't create something else, which we don't suspect could exist at this very moment...
well said. Yes, I totally agree with that, too. "Intelligence" cannot be defined as it is way too complex. It's not a fixed thing. Intelligent living is connected to surf every living moment using the right decisions, actions, and non-actions to the benefit of the participants of a system. This is tricky and if intelligent acting is not connected to ethical principles one gets lost in the definition of what is a losing and what is a winning result.
Yes, there will be created something else as always. That's the game.
I am here for questioning things and probably not only for popularity.
Absolutely with you on this point. I discuss something similar in my latest article from today !