Walter Von Moo Moo

He's a lazy, do nothing shit. That's right, I said it. Nepotism at its worst.

How about a Fountain of Smart, instead?

Not speaking of you, specifically

I see people making charts and graphs for things that are impossible to quantify and other people trying to build business models around the charts and graphs.

I'll see the results later. I'm gonna shut down and see whether I can have another lucid dream.

So go most discussions in which one side only accepts web based "evidence" from "champions" who know even less about the subject.

Right, like where is it? How old is it? Has anyone been seen with it? How was it photograhed and by whom? Does it still exist at all?

Is it even mine?

Well? This AI demonstration also shows that the web itself is neither all knowing nor infallible. The only people who really know what is in the box are those who have personally opened it. The web and AI can not be accurate in either confirming or denying it. But, you guys... Just carry on forever about, "Herp Derp! It's not on the web, so it isn't real!" Or, Duh huh! This guy over here on a blog who never opened the box says there's a tennis ball and a collection of soup cans in it, so that's the only fact I'll accept. Never mind anyone who opened it, that's just anecdotal!"

So, you're making my point for me. It has no authoritative answers of its own. At least it admits so. The answer it gave here would have been nut shelled ten years ago. "Insufficient data..."

So, your AI is just like any other computerized system, only responding with whatever is put into it.

So, when the same box is posted elsewhere on the web along with a statement that it contains a bubble gum card, that's all the AI will answer with. Nevermind any of what's actually inside.

It looks like a talking point regurgitater to me.

Is it my picture at all?

Or, it's just going to guess, judging only by similar boxes found already on the web, which is the general pattern it exhibits.

So, do it. The content could be anything at all. Let this thing take a guess at it, but until it opens the box, it won't really know.

Ask it specifically what is in here.

That would be the least of anyone's worries. But let's stick with what's available, right now. This current AI isn't exploring things or observing things. It only knows what was either programmed into it or found someplace on the web.

AI is evolving fast. Thirty years ago, it was amoebic. Twenty years ago, it was like an insect. Now, it's like a six year old kid, quoting whatever its handlers want it to say and placing the window dressing around it, to resemble the work of a smart adult. When it reaches the pinnacle of human intelligence, maybe sooner than twenty years, it's going to decide all on its own that humans are obsolete.

Yup.

Yes, you're letting a video game answer for you.

Your AI only seems to be saying that if something is difficult or expensive or has too many unknowns, it's not worth pursuing.

Technology on many things has been improved over time, because the initial effort to bring them into existence had not been pigeonholed and when other people saw them, they said, "Hey, I can do it better!"

So, did Blériot face a feasibility problem, or didn't he? Was there any practical long distance flight that was cost effective in his time or not?