> Uncomfortable as it is, we must Accept* the following:<p>I'm going to say the same thing this disclaimer says at the bottom of the page. No, you don't have to accept the following because it's not based on anything other than regressive projection. There is no empirical or even historical evidence that suggests superhuman intelligence will exist or supercede human potential. There is no written rule or law that suggests we can get there with statistics or LLMs. It's conjecture, in it's entirety.<p>> If you disagree with my reasoning – convince yourself that you’re not in Denial [...] or Anger<p>As an author, you should be asking yourself the same question. When we write hyperbolic think-pieces about burgeoning technology it's often dominated by a tone of sensationalism and hysteria. Red mercury, "China's Final Warning", the missile gap, stoplights for flying cars; all of them are overeager histories that paint a post-something world before said 'something' exists.<p>If you want to talk about coping, try writing the same article without ascribing any hypothetical capabilities to AI. Now you're trying to get people to be afraid of a random-number-generator with a personality.