Roko's Basilisk

How credible is that an AI
1.Would evolve to superhuman intelligence and control the world optimally, creating more value/life quality than anything else.
2.Would decide to review the past and find people who delayed its emergence and punish them
3.These people are supposedly programmers that didn't contribute to its emergence and not random bureaucrats responsible for funding or executives of hardware companies.
>tfw people had nightmares because of such bullshit theory

this is just the religious idea of eternal damnation reinvented as technobabble, which paradoxically makes it stupider than the purely religious equivalent. that's in general how I see a lot of AI/singularity cultists: a religion reinvented badly

Well...just in case i started styduing deep learing

deep dicking

>>2
It's Pascal's wager. You can replace almost all mentions of AI in AI nonsense with divine power or some comparable bullshit and get the same text back.

AI is overhyped bullshit that makes false claims and fails to deliver.
Weren't Lisp weenies talking about AI's merit starting in like the 70s? Yet they never delivered anything useful. Just smarmy ``we're better than you even though all our ideas are theoretical and we've never made anything actually useful.''
>>5
kek

deep learning is all bullshit too. everyone is so full of shit.

there will never be AI.