"human-like" vs. "smart"
>> "Achieving Artifical Intelligence" is inherently a statement of anthropomorphic expectation. If you want some other sort of intelligence, talk about it in another thread. <<
This is terminology issue which probably could last forever, but there are two competiting definitions of AI. One is making machines "human-like", and the other is making them "smart". If a machine was Volcan-like, I would still consider it "smart", but not really "human-like".
>> Saying, "there might be another way," without providing another way is ego-surfing at its worst. <<
The bottom line is that we don't know. It is like OO proof: without it all one can say is that they DON'T KNOW if X is objectively better than Y. (Note that OO being better for your own mind is not the same as being objectively better.)
If you DO know for sure one way or the other, then please present your evidence.
________________
oop.ismad.com