I don't think a piece of (AI? no, software? Meh?) thinking material needs to be above average human in its capabilities, or in any way consistently correct in its thinking, or in any way all that broadly learned, or in any way accountable - to cause significant mayhem if given half the chance.
There is this image of super-human, much faster, much broader thinking in the collective. When a bog standard human, drunk and in a foreign country, can do plenty. By this measure, chatGPTs are plenty intelligent enough - just not yet connected enough to tools, a wallet and vague orders or intentions.
There is this image of super-human, much faster, much broader thinking in the collective. When a bog standard human, drunk and in a foreign country, can do plenty. By this measure, chatGPTs are plenty intelligent enough - just not yet connected enough to tools, a wallet and vague orders or intentions.