> arguing that one day dogs will be able to talk, because why shouldn't they?
You misunderstand how evolution works. Humans are the product of over 10 million years of brutal selection pressure in favour of intellect. Before that, we indeed had about the same vocabulary as dogs (you should really say wolves, by the way - dogs are our invention).
If wolves/dogs were subject to the same pressure, then there's no reason why they would not eventually adapt in the same way humans did. However, humans got there first, and have so thoroughly colonised the earth that there is no chance of this happening.
> But to the level that it meta-tunes itself?
Well, you're extending AGI here into some kind of singularity runaway intelligence explosion. That's not within the scope of my argument. I have no opinion on that.
> it is only a clone and not at all 'artificial'
In my view, anything that is not naturally occurring is artificial.
You misunderstand how evolution works. Humans are the product of over 10 million years of brutal selection pressure in favour of intellect. Before that, we indeed had about the same vocabulary as dogs (you should really say wolves, by the way - dogs are our invention).
If wolves/dogs were subject to the same pressure, then there's no reason why they would not eventually adapt in the same way humans did. However, humans got there first, and have so thoroughly colonised the earth that there is no chance of this happening.
> But to the level that it meta-tunes itself?
Well, you're extending AGI here into some kind of singularity runaway intelligence explosion. That's not within the scope of my argument. I have no opinion on that.
> it is only a clone and not at all 'artificial'
In my view, anything that is not naturally occurring is artificial.