[imjustatechguy]

We got to the moon because of massively political support at the highest levels because it was viewed as a strategic necessity.

Climbing mountains doesn't seem that comparable to going to the moon.

Scientists need funding in order to act if it requires many man years.

Thus military uses of AI are likely to be well funded to the tune of hundreds of millions if not billions because they can be viewed as a strategic necessity if it seems like the Chinese could possibly develop an AI before us. But if the general feeling is that a real AI isn't feasible in both Chinese and US circles in the near or medium term future, or there are more valuable/useful near and medium term objectives, there will not be a well funded race to create one.

[weavejester]

Who said it needed to be well-funded? Creating a sentient AI is likely to become an easier undertaking as general computing technology and AI research advances. Creating such an AI in 20 or 30 years might require a large deal of funding, but what about in 50, 60 or even 100 years?

[imjustatechguy]

I don't think anyone can predict more than 20-30 years into the future with any real degree of accuracy.

So yeah, I agree that X might very well be possible (or in widespread usage) in 50 or 100 years, where X is basically anything that seems magical today.

[ignifero]

So did that political support come from some Divine Providence or some conspiratory group? Didn't it arise from the curiosity of humans who elected the politicians?

Also, what about Art? What a useless waste of brainpower, yet we keep doing it for thousands of years.

[zbyszek]

The fact that humans have been expending valuable brain-power on art for millenia might suggest that it does have some use, or more broadly, that utility is not always obvious.