Comment by molszanski

> His reasoning is very flawed and this book is responsible for a lot of needless consternation.

Is it? I feel that there is a stark difference between what you say and what I remember what was written in the book.

> We don’t know how human intelligence works.

I think it was addressed in the first half of the book. About research and progress in the subject. Both with the tissue scanning resolution, emulation attempts like human brain project and advances in 1:1 simulations on primitive nervous systems like worms that simulate 1 second in 1 real hour or something.

While primitive, we are doing exponential progress.

> Yet, the Bostrom view is that our greatest invention will just suddenly "emerge"

I think it is quite the contrary. There was nothing sudden in the reasoning. It was all about slow progress in various areas that gets us closer to advanced intelligence.

The path from a worm to a village idiot is million times longer than from a village idiot to the smartest person on earth.

> an entity able to create new knowledge at astounding rates yet completely lacking in other human qualities.

This subject was also explored IMO in the depth...

Maybe my memory is cloudy, I've read the book 5+ years ago, but it feels like we've understood it very (very) differently.

That said, for anyone reading, I am not convinced by the presented argument and suggest reading the book.