[mrjh]

“we realize we have no magic in our minds”

Surely an AI is a digital replica (and homage) of that magic? Without the magic in our minds we could’ve never created that replica.

To me it’s an acknowledgement of how awesome our own brains are that we want to even replicate them.

[jvanderbot]

I believe and hope people at least consider that, yeah an AI is a replica of that, and for all AIs failures, it's a really good replica of most of what it is to be human and "conscious". After that, it's all feeding back your story to yourself, and compounding memories from actual experience. (Which , have you noticed, are mostly stories)

[ProllyInfamous]

I think what THIS AGI REVOLUTION MEANS MOST to me is that "human creativity" is actually such a rare quality/attribute, as-to-be laughable that this [human creativity] is a "definingly human" characteristic/attribute, when so-few humans even have it [in any capacity].

What I have acknowledged after playing locally with Diffusion Bee's local GPU abilities... and Perplexity's ability to discuss in-depth knowledge across real-time information and entirely-unknown author's booklists. On both platforms I have submitted perhaps a few hundred queries over perhaps the past 60 days.

My next-door neighbor published his first [and only] book at 72, which I helped copy/edit... and it summarized his <10,000 sales war-memorabilia/tales quite well.

[pixl97]

So if we're magic and it is magic then technically this is ok.

But the problem is we create it, so it can't be magic. So if we're magic and it is not magic then its just an object we are free to abuse (at least from many peoples perspective).

I like to think of it as we're complex and interesting, and it is complex and interesting but neither of us is magic. We don't like to be abused, so creating something like us and abusing it would be completely unethical.