Raw LLM Responses

+Dannykid8 ... Cool. Continuing your thought, if there are 8 or 10 different inputs including those you mentioned, adding ignition and valve timing, temp, O2, humidity, fuel octane, up vs down hill (load) etc etc, the number of possible combinations of values quickly soar into the hundreds of billions, and a car quickly figuring out what's best with experience via trial and error can be a highly efficient process (instead of randomly trying every combination sequentially) and that IS in the wheelhouse of what you and I might refer to as intelligent. That's like the Monte Carlo simulation I wrote for optimizing values before I knew it was called that, for a stock market trading algorithm. The fly in the ointment is that regular folks are so impressed by such things they think it is a natural easy step for the software to become self-aware next. If they were writing the code, they would realize how mechanical it is, where it has to be told to do every single solitary thing, and how easily breakable it is. They would be disabused of that sentience notion, never to be heard from their mouths again. They would know, it ain't gonna happen, we flatter ourselves. The only ones who think we can create intelligence with code are those who don't currently write code. Yes, code is powerful, one single added line can rig the outcome of elections dynamically and hide easily for example, but as humans we glorify what we don't understand (if we don't fear it too much, in which case we denigrate it).