[dinfinity]

> That's like looking at a bicycle or car and saying "all the evidence points out we'll be able to do interstellar travel in the future".

Incorrect. The difference between interstellar travel and land based travel on earth is enormous. The difference between current AI and AGI is tiny in comparison.

You're not saying it, but people might interpret 'interstellar travel' to be faster than light or very close to it, which means breaking the laws of physics or spending prohibitive amounts of energy. AGI needs no such thing, as evidenced by human brains running on < 100 watt.

Interstellar travel at far lower speeds is indeed probably something we will be able to do, looking at what we've done in space travel in the past 100 years. Although again, the resources required to do so as dictated by the laws of physics make it incredibly expensive. Given the low benefit it is probably not going to happen soon.

Reaching AGI is cheap as fuck and far more potent in comparison, so it will happen sooner.

[pier25]

> The difference between current AI and AGI is tiny in comparison.

Splendid. You should probably tell people like Yann LeCun this. He will be happy to hear it. /s

> Interstellar travel at far lower speeds is indeed probably something we will be able to do

Speed is not even an issue. We don't even know bigger problems like the long term effects of zero gravity in the human body or what dangers we'd encounter beyond the heliosphere.

[dinfinity]

> Splendid. You should probably tell people like Yann LeCun this. He will be happy to hear it. /s

Do you have an actual counterpoint or is this edgy nonsense the extent of your capabilities?

> We don't even know bigger problems like the long term effects of zero gravity in the human body or what dangers we'd encounter beyond the heliosphere.

So you agree that your analogy was bad. Good.

[pier25]

So now that you've run out of fantastical declarations you are now recurring to ad hominem attacks. You must be fun at parties.