You need help.

>You're assuming super intelligence can exist without consciousness, and even if it could, then the human beings that create the first ASI will just use it to dominate the world.

AI hasn't needed it so far and produced amazing results. See alpha fold, alpha go, imagen, gpt3, etc.

> ASI sees itself as a conscious living organism, which means it (also) values survival and reproduction.

Why would it see itself as a conscious living organism?

Just because something can understand things and work on a super intelligent level doesn't mean it has to have its own will, agency, or sentience.

Well, about half of them weren't that excited about the Tesla bot to put it mildly.

I think one put it succinctly: you (Tesla) are not as good as you think you are, but you're not as bad as they think you are.

It's a good start and a reasonable person would wait and see what they do with it in the coming months or year(s) before dismissing it altogether in my opinion.

>It’s sub par to it’s competitors (Asimo, Boston Dynamics, other purpose built solutions ), and demonstrates nothing that exceeds them.

You're comparing things that took years and years to make to something that was done in 6-8months. Do you know how time works? Do you realize that Tesla is not done yet? I'm seriously puzzled.

>If you were making a competitive product to Twitter and all your MVP did was allow you to post content to a single page and create an account. It doesn’t matter if it took you 5 months or 1 day. It does nothing better than it’s competitors and doesn’t demonstrate competency that says to me that you can deliver anything that will be successful.

This is so silly I don't even know where to begin. I was going to say "clearly you've never worked to deliver technical milestones for a client". But the same principle applies anywhere.

Let's say you ask two teams to bid for your contract to "make me a twitter clone". Milestone 1 or the POC is "create account + post content to single page". Team 1 takes 5 months to deliver and team 2 takes 1 day to deliver that milestone. Are you seriously telling me you wouldn't know which team to give the contract to? That's a joke right?

It's like if you had a race and runner 1 had a 1 hour head start and they ran 20km. Then runner 2 started running and ran 15km in 30min. Meanwhile, runner 1 is at 25km. What you're saying is "runner 2 is sub par, it took him 1hour 30 min to run 15km! while runner 1 is at 25km!"

So, you fail to see that runner 2 didn't even start running until 1 hour into the race, you also didn't notice runner 1 is starting to slow down. (Asimo is no longer being developed and Boston Dynamics' Atlas still doesn't have any hands.)

On top of that, the race is far from over.

I can't believe someone is arguing that it doesn't matter how long something takes to develop.

What's sub par about it? Maybe you don't understand what an MVP is?

If my team is tasked with developing a complex software solution and we manage to develop an MVP with a solid technical foundation in a short amount of time, the client will absolutely be happy with that.

The importing thing is how quickly they can get to something usable from here.

Very nice to hear some level headed experts. I had similar thoughts: not ground breaking but good for the amount of time they had spent on it. Has potential. Animesh Garg gave some good insights about possible advantages and disadvantages of the chosen components.

Thanks for sharing!

>when its core business is failing.

This is a joke post, right?

> Why go through the trouble of designing an entire circuit board and chipset when you can just use a GPU, like everybody else?

You didn't watch the presentation at all did you? They literally answer this question and back it up with data and stats.

Seems like you only saw a clip of the robot and didn't listen to the presentation at all or didn't understand any of it.

> Like automatically you would force the person to work forever.

You should learn to save and invest in an index fund that follows the s&p500 or something.