In the context of the rest of the piece, I read this as sarcasm. The author is making fun of the species of narcissistic silly con valley techbro who actually believes such nonsense.

▲

FloorEgg 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Ah, I struggle with sarcasm sometimes and I was a bit distracted while reading. I'll give it another chance.

▲

TSiege 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It is not sarcasm he is fleshing out this sentence earlier in the paragraph, "One of the pervasive new doctrines of Silicon Valley is that we’re in the early stages of a bifurcation event"

▲

jcgrillo 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Right, but in the context of this article about these wretched enfents terribles, and later when we get to the rationalist termite colony, it's clearly something to chuckle at. Like, the fact that people think this "bifurcation event" idea is real is legitimately funny.

▲

TSiege 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I see your point, but I don't think he's being sarcastic in this paragraph. To me this paragraph isn't sarcasm rather he's presently a serious factual recounting of the logic driving AI evangelists that he then undermines by contrasting it with the callousness, messiness, and illogic of the people pushing this narrative. (I too had a good chuckle at the termite description)

But this is veering into lit crit territory, so agree to disagree

	▲	jcgrillo 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You may have a point! And you've given me a great excuse to read this one again later this evening :)

▲

kerblang 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I suspect the author is struggling with their own sarcasm.

▲

moritzwarhier 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There's no worth in sarcastically repeating memes like "giga nerd" or whatever except for propagating this line if thinking / the meme.

Imagination knows no negation.

▲

zozbot234 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's a really bad take because AI is already "superhuman" in general knowledge, but it still has trouble figuring out whether I should drive or walk to the car wash place.

	▲	moritzwarhier 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Declaring something as "superhuman" requires a hierarchy of inherent human value. I'm not saying this for social reasons, just for the definition: "superhuman intelligence" at what? Calculations? Puzzles? Sudokus? Or more like... image classification? ("is this a thief?", "is this a rope?", "is this a medical professional?", "is this a tree?") Oh, applying the former to the latter would be a pretty stupid category error. It's almost as if people had this figured out centuries ago...