Point taken, but the experimental validation might look very different for ai than you'd think. For instance, instead of needing to run 100.000 generic tests, it would only need 100 extremely detailed tests

Nah, in this industry there is so much need for massive worlds and tons of content that there's plenty of cases where we need educated people steering the ai. Even if it would be 0.001% of raw dev tasks, that could still mean there's plenty of work in every aspect of the field.

That fx crew business model isn't actual creating production level content, it's YT videos for noobs

No, investors do already see these things. It's just that the studios will tell them that this is not how it works.

Because in real production you need something you can actually have control over and rely on. For instance, you want to be able to rerender it exactly the same again, you want to make specific changes. You want every frame to be tailored to your needs. The lack of all such things alike doesn't make it compatible with a modern production pipeline yet. But since most people just want to watch anything, regardless of it being shit, im sure it will be adopted soon.

Not far from solved. Don't judge from corridor crew, these guys are always late to the party.

Haven't watched it, but aside from solving the temporal issues, another expected issue when it comes to fluidity is that ai is less likely to chose the same key frames as a human would, thus it all flowing less like we know it. However, that too is not far from being solved either.

Damn you're full of yourself.

Well, It's not made for making conversation and people should really stop using it as such. They are ending up forcing a perfect tool to pretending to be a flawed human. They are steering it towards having pathetic conversations on uninteresting matters. Before we know it, the ai will start asking us if we've seen the game... and that's not a good thing.

What is weird is to ask for judgement right after stating you're preferring a non-judgemental environment.

Great, being an asshole at ai is surely going to end well.

Ok, i see your point and i agree. It's clearly different from actual disease that are destroying the proper function of our body. it's more of an unwanted by product of evolution. But i wouldn't be surprised that one day we will still call something like,say, a low IQ, a neurological disease. Who knows.

Regarding evolving immortality: I do think that even with our imperfect baggage, there's still a lot of ways for us to optimize by tinkering with what we have.

Funny thing about that is that depending on the environmental conditions, telomere shortening could've actually increased lifespan.

Well, at the end i see it as surrendering to the natural ways because 'natural = good and the way it should be'. And i disagree with that view. Although im not sure if that's what you think here so i dont want to put words in your mouth.

But aside of that, it's not the full picture that you're stating here. We are still evolving, and there's no reason why we can not evolve to become immortals naturally. There are plenty of existing mechanisms to exploit that could help us get older and older. All that's needed is some natural selection and a culture of keeping having babies up to your latest years to spread the genes.

So if 100000 years from now. A naturally evolved humanity that can reach ages far over 5000 years old looks back to our times. You know there's no way they'd think our short lives were the way it was actually meant to be. Just like we aren't romanticizing smaller brains and shorter lifespans.

Sounds like the appeal to nature fallacy.

One important thing to note is that ai progress isn't yet bottlenecked by companies trying to regulate the market. Like with smartphones and consoles.while technologically it might be possible, SONY can't release a new playstation every month, because it wouldn't make any sense to do so.

Naive would be to think the government can do anything about it. Any obstacle put in ai's way will literally only make it stronger and undermine the petty human law givers even further. What we need is to find ways to adjust our societies to it, not the other way around.