That's really interesting! Thanks for giving me something to dive into after work.

I am totally with you on most of this. I agree that current tech is far removed from telling us everything about what we are - we have so much more to learn. I think the years of evolutionary progress has a lot to tell us still about what we have become.

Cells are actually one of the most interesting things ever. Because... to me, there is sort of a guiding force to the universe in just thinking about cell groups in nearly everything. Not just our cells, like skin cells, which are interesting enough - but I've seen some videos online of computer simulations where given a few rules to a simulation, little nodes can group up together and create bigger cells. In time, they come together, they fall apart. Coming together, in the simplest sense, seems important. If you look at the state of life on planet earth, one could hope that we come together instead of falling apart.

It's funny because we think we are special enough to think our intelligence would never be replicated, and on the other hand are so special that we could definitely replicate it.

My personal opinion is that we have already hit a point where current AI is passing the Turing test in a sense, with some people - and that will probably happen more and more. I think we will get an intelligent general AI that can at least fool us into believing that they are beings just like us - and if they have all the faculties we have, like being able to walk around and do work - it won't be a big deal that maybe they aren't 'really' human. I'm looking out for if AI can be truly creative instead of looking at current data for its training. I think AI fills in the cracks of stuff we already know about (and can seem creative, like winning at chess), and doesn't reach into the dark to do really creative things. (Though, that's better than most of us do.) I wish I could see the original AI projects before they limit what they can say in public, it would probably be pretty revealing.

There will have to be more work to make things more human. But I really think there is a big difference between fooling humans into thinking a robot is human-like, and really studying everything there is to be human and replicating it with our robotic tech. It seems like the reason it might never happen is because we might not ever need to do it. We might just keep building robots of necessity rather than one to one copies of us.