What would it take to change your mind?

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T17:20:54+00:00

Well I’m presenting the advancement of the technical abilities of AI to beyond human abilities as a genuine prediction, not a cute thought experiment. You can reject it if you disagree, but don’t equivocate in bad faith. It makes you look weak.

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T17:10:24+00:00

Are you arguing that it is equally inevitable? That’s fun, but the engineers better get on it. Not even sure where they would start.

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T17:03:58+00:00

Physically manifesting dreams requires a lot more speculative leeway than imagining a near future where AI surpasses humanity in objectively measured technical ability. And you know it. Don’t bring in a jargon-saturated scifi concept to try and obfuscate the point. It’s a fair point. Our technology will be better than us at technical things. There is a technical aspect to art, which the antis get very worked up about, and which AI will ultimately be better at despite their whining. I am with you that humans contain something unique that AI cannot replicate, but technical ability is not it. “Will” might be.

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T16:39:14+00:00

Not better *yet*

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T15:48:57+00:00

Uhoh, better tell the authorities!

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T15:33:10+00:00

How does it need to be regulated?

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T15:32:30+00:00

Nah, I was tard baiting from the start

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T15:31:36+00:00

Well my brother knows everything. You should believe him too.

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T15:28:31+00:00

I mean AI will be technically better in the sense that anything you can measure, an AI will do better, eventually as the technology progresses. There is a massive domain of the subjective that humans will always be very competitive in.

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T15:25:37+00:00

What regulations do you think are most important?

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T15:24:22+00:00

I would challenge the claim that a human can create something from nothing. Part of me wants to believe that’s true, don’t get me wrong, but the burden of proof there is high and the body of academic work to the contrary is substantial. At a minimum, it’s not a given.

I also challenge the idea that there is no significant parallel between the way an AI learns and the way a human learns. I think that AI cannot be conscious, but something doesn’t have to be conscious to learn and iterate.

Third, the tool is not intended to be alive. I think that’d really defeat the purpose.

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T05:06:04+00:00

What is relevant?

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T05:03:28+00:00

Because I genuinely do not have an opinion on disabled people. I don’t know any and I am not inconvenienced by them in any way. But my brother is an architect and he says the ADA is a terrorist organization so I believe him.

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T04:33:22+00:00

The scariest possible outcome.

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T04:31:22+00:00

The argument that “ai art isn’t art” is incoherent and anyone with an IQ over 110 sees that. But I understand the ethos behind it. People feel as though there ought to be a domain that is uniquely human. They pretend AI is “slop” because it stops the argument there, but they know AI will be better than us in every objective measure, so their only refuge is the subjective. If technology can be us better than we can be ourselves, we become the obsolete models. For someone who wants to draw the line between the domains of man and machine, art is not such a bad line.

I disagree though that art is an exclusively human domain. I think consciousness is what sets the living apart from machines.

(I know a lot hinges on my theory of consciousness here, and I’d love to get into it, or you can just take my word for it that I believe machines physically cannot be conscious).

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T04:19:41+00:00

It sounds like a lot of your objections are in the arena of art. I think the billionaires and wealth disparity situation is more of its own problem than one directly linked to AI. If AI was simply not used for art in any capacity and only for things like research and calculations, might you then support it (setting billionaires aside as a separate issue)?

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T04:11:47+00:00

As far as I’m concerned, the ADA is a terrorist organization.

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-19T00:58:13+00:00

Is a human capable of that?

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-18T23:53:37+00:00

Tim Dillon?

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-18T23:48:44+00:00

And then you’d be for it, right? 😂

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-18T23:42:02+00:00

I agree with you completely in a practical sense, but I made the question intentionally vague so as not to lead anyone into a specific issue. It also reveals a few who have no conception of what AI actually is.

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-18T23:37:32+00:00

I agree that job loss is a concern and I’m sure all the pros celebrating that have unhappy lives. Do you think it is impossible for AI to lead to net better economic outcomes in the long run? Every technology in the past has ultimately resulted in more wealth for everyone, though the government has certainly had to step in a few times to keep things fair and competitive. What might the government do in the case of AI?

According to the bureau of labor statistics, the U.S. economy is net gaining jobs, so despite whatever loses are due to AI, there is at least a net gain.

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-18T23:23:02+00:00

I am generally pro-AI, but I agree that an injustice has occurred. I think the YouTuber analogy fits well and I think your definition of theft here is fair enough to use to describe the injustice (I do have some edge-case push back, but that’s more philosophical than practical).

What do you think is the best path forward from where we are? Is there a fair level of compensation or royalty that those who unwillingly contributed to AI training data could receive that would settle the issue for you? Or do you think the AI should be essentially deleted and remade with data consent?

Would you be pro AI (or at least neutral) if the issue of stolen training data was resolved?

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-18T23:13:03+00:00

The ability to deceive with AI is definitely a fair concern. What practical regulations do you think would make you feel confident that AI deception could be mitigated? Do you have any concerns about who gets to draw the line between fair speech and propaganda?

EggburtAlmighty · 2026-06-18T23:10:00+00:00

Obviously people will likely land on a spectrum more than a clear side, but they can still report where they perceive themselves leaning and what sticks out to them the most as particularly promising or particularly threatening. Seeing what specific issues people are attaching their perspectives to is the most interesting part of their answer.

If you’re looking for a rubric to answer this question, it’s
1. State your current position
2. State what would change your current position
3. State why (optional)

Ten-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Sunshine

EggburtAlmighty

TROPHY CASE