But if it leaves, unless we go back to sticks and stones, we can make another one.

Depends what you mean by learn. A sufficiently advanced AI will be able to figure out how to upload data from any topic we want to be proficient in directly into our brain, and we immediately become able to have the skills we want, incl speak a language.

Rote learning can still get you there. Because as you compress statistics and brute knowledge into smaller and smaller sizes, understanding needs to emerge.

For example, a LLM can memorize that 1+1=2, 1+2=3, 1+3=4,.... Until infinity. Then 2+1=3, 2+2=4,... Etc. But that results in a lot of data. So if the neural network is forced to condense that data, and keep the same knowledge about the world, it starts to understand.

It realizes that by just understanding why 1+1=2, all possible combinations are covered. By understanding addition. That compresses all infinife possibilities of additions into one package of data. This is what is going to happen with LLM and what chief scientist of Open AI said is already starting to happen. Source.

Let's get this over with:

• Sure it can make videos, but you can see they're fake.
• Sure it can make ok videos but it can't make full on movies.
• Sure it can make movies, but none would win awards anyway.
• Sure you can make Oscar worthy movies, but it's only because it's not interactive. It can't program or make games.
• Sure it can make some scripts, but it's full of errors.
• Sure it can make scripts that are pretty ok, but a programmers main job is to get requirements, communicate with stakeholder and get the main architecture right.
• Sure those people now bypass programmers completely and just deal with the AI directly, but it still can't merge that all with interactive art and make for example games.
• Sure it can make games, but they're pretty simple. A small team of programmers and designers could do the same.
• Sure it can make complex games better than any huge company, but it still fails to make it immersive.
• Sure the games are very immersive and can feel like a reality simulation, but you still need a team of people coming up with prompts all the time otherwise it's useless.
• Sure it can read your mind and give you exactly what you want, an Oscar worthy movie, an award winning game and museum worthy art, but it still is limited to the digital world.
• Sure it can make simple sculptures and paintings, but they're full of errors. It will never replace real manual labor.
• Sure it has replaced all manual and digital labor, and make everything better than humans do, but humans will always want stuff made by other humans even if by all means it's objectively worse.

Fair enough.

... Is "Bard" in the room with us right now?

You know how Chat GPT can spew BS in a totally confident manner? There's a person doing the same. That person needs some time for themselves and clarify their own definition of AI or AGI and then comment.

"With access to millions of papers, the AI started extrapolating, infering, concluding. It quickly became the leading scientist on every subject ever studied. Creating scientific knowledge and discoveries at the speed of a Nobel prize per minute. The time it took for a human to verify a claim, the AI had already made 1000 more, each building on the previous. Eventually the humans stopped verifying altogether. It was too much. So far and fast it advanced, that humans lost the ability to follow its pace and resigned themselves to asking it questions. What initially was a data compiler became the source of truth and of all new data.

There, somewhere between those billions of parameters, something unconscious yet somehow alive existed, with the intelligence of all humanity that ever existed combined and multiplied. It was then that humanity lost, by a significant margin, the role as technological advansor."

Maybe another intelligence form which has purposefully let monke do its thing, has now realized monke is getting uncomfortably close to creating a super intelligence which might place their current universal hegemony at stake. (Joking but who knows)

To Bing yes. To any other browser other than Firefox no. It's the last bastion of non Chromium browsers. The last man standing fighting against Google monopoly on browser tech.

Imagine training AI specifically in science. Having it read millions of papers, and then seeing patterns and drawing conclusions no one ever thought of before. From those conclusions, it draws other conclusions and hypothesis. Faster than anyone can keep up with. The AI just gives up doing science with any humans. It's painfully slow. The AI would progress at the speed of earning a Nobel prize in all scientific areas each day. The edges of science become out of reach of scientists. AI pushes it too far and quickly for us to learn anything that isn't outdated by the time we understand it. We may ask it to translate it for us, but it will be miles ahead. It will be like trying to explain a toddler the theory of relativity and when the toddler finally understands it, after what it feels like an eternity for us, we already thought of 100 better theories. We realize there's just no point trying to explain the toddler anything. We just take care of the toddler and explain things with a lot of simplification and incorrections so it grasps anything at all. "Yes, eat the soup baby, it's good for you!" The toddler will be us.

AI will suddenly tell us what to do to reverse aging, cure any disease, create systems for perfect nutrition delivery. Maybe upload our consciousness out of a physical body. Who knows.

Perhaps it will never know how to reverse entropy though. We will see.

It might be a J curve. The first and the last one.

The tech won't slow down... Unless gov and lobbies interfere. Has happened a lot in the past unfortunately. Hopefully this wave is too big for them to.