When you are developing an autocratic regime within an elected system, criminal extralegal military action reveals who the leaders are who will act criminally (are "loyal") segregating them from the constitutional adherents who oppose you.
It's a final step to overthrowing the US's elected officials or rendering them powerless.
I'm concerned that coders and the general public will confuse optimization with intelligence. That's the nature of propaganda, substituting sleight of hand to create a false narrative.
It doesn't happen "btwn ears" and math is an illusion of imprecision. The fundamental barrier is frameworks and computers will not be involved. There will be software obviously. But it will never be computed.
It's not magic. It's neural syntax. And nothing trapped by computation is occurring. It's not a model, it is the world as actions.
The computer is a hand-me-down tool under evolution's glass ceiling. This should be obvious: binary, symbols, metaphors. These are toys (ie they are models), and humans are in our adolescent stage using these toys.
Only analog correlation gets us to agency and thought.
It's science under the creative boundary of binary/symbols. And as analog thinkers, we should be developing far greater tools than these glass ceilings. And yes, having finished the film, it's far more propagandic than it began as.
Science is exceeding the envelop of paradox, and what I see here is obeying the envelope in order to justify the binary as a path to AGI. It's not a path. The symbol is a bottleneck.
Agency will emerge from exceeding the bottleneck of evolution's hand-me-down tools: binary, symbols, metaphors. As long as these unconscious sportscasters for thought "explain" to us what thought "is", we are trapped. DeepMind is simply another circular hamster wheel of evolution. Just look at the status-propaganda the film heightens in order to justify the magic.
"I believe that artificial general intelligence (AGI) is achievable."
And the problem is circular: as the Riley Verge piece citing Fedorenko https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46072838 exhibits, words aren't related to thoughts. And do the thought experiment, neither are symbols, math, binary. They're all factorized, linear models of real events, which are manifold, nested, scale invariant, in other words, analog correlations.
AGI isn't solvable under these current technologies.
The nativist cog-sci program doesn't run in our heads or externalized. It's false.
The key is that there is no content to thought. It's all nested oscillations. It can't be extracted as symbols, so there is no connection between them. Words play the role of a sportscaster reading the minds of the players by observing their behavior. How accurate are they or are we about ourselves? Not very.
Language may ultimately be maladaptive as it is arbitrary and disconnected from thought. Who cares about the gibberish of logic/philosophy when survival is at stake in ecological balance? The key idea is, there are events. They are real. The words we use are false/inaccurate externalizations of those events. Words and symbols are bottlenecks that place the events out of analog reach but fool us by our own simulation processes into thinking they are accurate.
Words are essentially very poor forms of interoception or metacognition. They "explain" our thoughts to us by fooling us. Yet how much of the senses/perceptions are accessible in consciousness. Not very much. The computer serves to further the maladaption by both accelerating the symbols and sutomating them, which puts the initial real events even further from reach. The only game is how much we can fool the species through the lowres inputs the PFC demands. This appears to be a sizable value center for Silicon Valley, and it seems to require coders to ignore the whole of experience and rely solely on the bottleneck simulations centers of the PFC which themselves are disconnected from direct sensory access. Computers, 'social' media, AI, code, VR essentially "play" the PFC.
How these basic thought experiments that have been tested in cog neuroscience since the 90s in the overthrow of the cog sci models of the 40s-80s were not taught as primer classes in AI and comp sci is beyond me. It takes now third gen neurobiology crossed with linguistics to set the record straight.