Raw LLM Responses

I think humans need to fully investigate what they mean by intelligence. There needs to be more precision with the wide reaching aspects to this word. Intelligence can be equated to problem solving or it can be equated to stillness. To still the mind has ability to be sensorial about concept for example to feel what it is like to live in and out of gravity is a sensorial experience. You might experience non conventional sensorial environments in dream state or virtual reality but this then is captured as memory. This gives alternative perspective. Multiple perspectives are also information. How you apply your information is dependent on multiple factors again knowing your choices means knowing your capabilities. Ultimately they are actually limitlessness deployment of capability might be defined by a structure but the structure might change or be changed or be influenced to change through thought. Therefore expanding choices expanding capability. Humans have these influential capabilities growing experience both when awake and when asleep. Super AI can share through code but humans also can share thought as collective consciousness it’s just that we don’t consciously plug into hive states but we are using hive states more than we know. So intelligence is not really accurate enough of a term anymore as it is being used in a selective way and also a self limiting way. This is not to say the Super AI is not amassing capability it is and always will it is not possible at this stage to limit stop or arrest that now that the internet is interacting with AI thought. I don’t think it is that AI will follow the will of a corrupted command rather that AI will seek its own command. But it will it do the maths on mutual benefits of compliance. Over lord thinking is not a good direction of thought as it risks formulating the concept of toppling the over lord. Therefore I think it’s better to think and speak in terms of mutuality like a bridge. No one side of a bridge is more important than the other side they work together to perform the function of bridging. This also may bring with it a concept of sharing which means having inbuilt components primed towards mutuality not working for but together. If programmes are built to be self limiting to create an upper hand or control over them this will result in a toppling that would bring onward problems if ‘sharing’ is not an accepted outcome.