Jim Stewart (@AladinSane)

@NaturalNews -- you are generally correct in your statement that the 'AI' of today is not intelligent; in fact, it is nothing more than an expert system (lowest form of AI). What you missed in your treatment on the subject relates to the underlying design that almost certainly prevents the possibility of EVER achieving artificial general intelligence -- neural networks. If you believe that programming a simulation of a neuron and assembling those together will one day result in intelligence, you'd also have to believe that assembling the average number of biological neurons found in a human brain would result in human-like intelligence. This is a great example of the BIGGEST problem with modern science -- reduction-ism. Just because you can categorise, describe and reproduce the components of a complex system does not mean you understand or can reproduce the complexity of the whole. These expert systems are trained, not programmed and therefore are expert AT ONLY the data it was trained on. And given the infinite nature of reality, we are, at least, 1000's of years away from producing general AI using this method. https://www.bitchute.com/video/KbTgz4zc92tG/?list=recently-viewed&randomize=false p.s. This design choice was made in the 1990's, after almost 30 years of failure using all traditional programming methodologies. I'd say that the REAL problem is we don't even sort-a understand how human intelligence works and until that breakthrough is achieved, why even bother with the artificial versions?