@ThePortugueseGuy considering the secular trend, probably back then, especially if you had capabilities beyond their reckoning, that they couldn't explain going forward

@Gunner Fox no. If the goal is testing the bot's intelligence, it disobeying you would be a remarkable success.

Lol

@Legalize isn't that the mass effect storyline?

@DJ_Anuz is that really in there? That sounds super cringey

Minus maccabees the bible was pretty much universally agreed to by 400 A.D. but you do you

I played mass effect 1. I made a soldier. He was pretty good at ignoring damage and shooting badguys.

Depends on how you define intelligence. If your definition is a given program's ability to perform a given task, then no, never free will. You want it to do a thing and just that thing. If the definition is a program's ability to be creative or some shit then yeah probably, but outsourcing your creativity to robots seems like a good way for the robots to come up with the idea that maybe the universe might just be better off if humans weren't around

@Beemann it wasn't cringey how they worded it lol

Would the universe be less interesting without humans?

It's pretty cringey and vapid to make an argument stemming from an entirely fictional work, using it as though they were real events

I don't think the universe would know we were gone if we disappeared @Gunner Fox

@Beemann that what the miracles are all about and what he Did. He raised people 4 days after they being death.

"Gene experimentation is bad. I know, because I've seen/read Jurassic Park XD"

@Beemann perhaps, though science fiction isn't allll fiction.

It's quite literally fiction

Well, humans would probably stop the robits from doing whatever it is they pleased to whatever programmed autistic ideal they wanted, so in the case of "we think paperclips are interesting" humans are not paperclips, and thus actively detract from the possible interesting...ness... of the universe in their current form

But that doesn't mean you shouldn't consider the ramifications of creating an unhackable sentient AI that can self replicate and consume biomass as fuel.

And science fiction can prime your mind to think about the possible scenarios

@ThePortugueseGuy which depends on belief of that claim, which rests on a layer of assumptions

@DJ_Anuz unhackable is a fantasy

@DJ_Anuz it d3pends on if the universe is capable of noticing I guess 😅

If it were actively changing its own programming it'd probably be pretty difficult to hack

@Beemann they weren't unhackable, true. But they were unhackable with current technology and the time they had available.

So video where even today we can make anything in a movie would always be a proof?

Hades is by far a much bigger threat than the faro plague though. He's actually sentient. The plague was just a mindless swarm, though it did have some pretty advanced self learning.

No one is in here raising the death

Video from before we had video would be proof

There's no proof that anyone raised the dead

Also Kurzweil has something like 80% plus correct predictions about the future of technology despite being a science fiction author so it might behoove you to at least take a gander at what science fiction predicts might be coming up

And if you believe the apostles witnesses are proof enough, then you need to believe the Mormon witnesses are enough proof that they saw the gold plates the Book Of Mormon supposedly came from.

If we opened up a sealed Egyptian tomb and found a fucking VHS that we could carbon date back to the appropriate era, that would be a thing

If he had invented the television he could invent premiere and skip his own dieing

If the Bible mentioned a confirmable scientific discovery and was consistent with other later discoveries, that would lend greater credibility

@Beemann does carbon dating work on plastics?

Wait duh.

There's tons of carbon in plastic xD

Ray Kurzweil is an inventor and writes nonfiction. Is there another Kurzweil?

Isn't carbon dating less effective than we thought?

Like most things it isn't perfect

@Gunner Fox depends on how far back you're going to look.

All you'd need to confirm is that it's older than VHS