[ryandvm]

I think the only people that don't think we're going to see AGI within the next 70 years are people that believe consciousness involves "magic". That is, some sort of mystical or quantum component that is, by definition, out of our reach.

The rest of us believe that the human brain is pretty much just a meat computer that differs from lower life forms mostly quantitatively. If that's the case, then there really isn't much reason to believe we can't do exactly what nature did and just keep scaling shit up until it's smart.

[cosmic_cheese]

I don't think there's "magic" exactly, but I do believe that there's a high chance that the missing elements will be found in places that are non-intuitive and beyond the scope of current research focus.

The reason is because this has generally been how major discoveries have worked. Science and technology as a whole advances more rapidly when both R&D funding is higher across the board and funding profiles are less spiky and more even. Diminishing returns accumulate pretty quickly with intense focus.

[shahzbha]

Sufficiently advanced science is no different than magic. Religion could be directionally correct, if off on the specifics.

I think there’s a good bit of hubris in assuming we even have the capacity to understand everything. Not to say we can’t achieve AGI, but we’re listening to a salesman tell us what the future holds.

[phainopepla2]

I'm not sure why you would characterize the possibility that consciousness relies on quantum mechanics to be "magic". Quantum mechanics are very real.