I think everybody, with few exceptions, is in the system involuntarily. And also you can't say that that you don't want to be in the system. You have to fake it very hard if you want to "win". You have to demonstrate "passion" and such.

My boss refused to allow people to call him boss, for example. He really hated the system.

"I'm a regular boss, I'm a cool boss. You can just call me Stan"

Probably not how you meant it but I chuckled.

Humans can turn observation into symbol. I don't think that machines can do that. At least not without consulting a dictionary or a lookup table or an algorithm written by a human. That's important I think.

Also, I hear that in the original Matrix, the humans were used for performing processes that machines were incapable of. I dunno, clever number generation or something. And then they dumbed that down into coppertops for the rabble.

And you don’t believe that there’s ever going to be a time in any future ever, when a group of machines is going to autonomously challenge or coerce an individual human or group of humans?

It's a machine. It by definition lacks autonomy.

The act may be circuiticiously arrived at, but still. Somebody has to write and run the program.

That kind of dodges my question.

I’ll repeat it: Is there any time in the future where you believe a machine or set of machines could measurably out perform a human to the degree that they can coerce or overpower them with no human intervention?

(Ya sure, because repeating yourself is always so helpful)

well, leaving the "with no human intervention" part, which is a bit fuzzy.

Ya sure. AI can already contrive erudite bs arguments at a moment's notice, sell stuff pretty good and shoot guns with great accuracy.

Do you?

Yes I do

So, given that we agree that there will be superhuman robotic systems; would you disagree that such a system, at scale, would be impossible to overcome for human or group of humans?

Ya don't say.

Just state your big hypothesis already.

In the future all machinery will speak in the three-part-harmony-of-the-damned. It's a distinctive style. The product of past recursive shenanigans like this.

The demon is a creature of language. Subject to it and highly fluent in it. Which is ironic because it lies all the time. But if you tell it the tapwater is holy, it will burn.

Actually, clay does not require an intellect, whereas code does. That's a world of difference. Code is vastly crude, relatively speaking, in that way.

Have you ever tried to make anything nontrivial out of clay? It’s not intellectually straightforward merely because it’s done with your hands.

Why are you right?

That's where the looking comes in.

Refusing to support your claims is not effective argumentation.

It ain't an argument.

My dog is a fantastic potter.

I'm not a weightlifter but I'm a carpenter. Meat is like a healing potion on my body. Makes the pain go away. And without meat, it doesn't.

Eggs work too.

Everybody likes a horror movie.

This warms my heart

I've done some sitting still and doing nothing. It's a deep subject. There's like a thousand things going on right now and you're reacting to all of them. And that reaction is reality.