Exceed in some regards but not others right? Like, let’s not imagine the plane is better at being a bird than the bird. It’s an evocative set of associations though. Makes me think we’ll end up creating the Concorde of intelligence but be no closer to understanding how our own works…
Yeah, nature does it bottom-up through evolution of self-assembling, self-replicating machines. A lot of "design constraints" that go into living things has to do with... keeping them alive. Compare an electrical wire or silicon trace with a biological nerve or neuron - the former are just simple traces of inert metal, the latter are complex nanomachines mostly dedicated to self-maintenance, and incidentally conducting electricity.
Point being, we can't compete with nature across every dimension simultaneously, but we don't need to, and we shouldn't, because we don't need most of the features of natural solution, not at this point. We don't need Concordes hatching from eggs - we have factories that build them.
I agree that creating something akin to an organic being exceeds capabilities at present. But to be fair we never tried to build a bird, instead we tried to build a machine to fly and we excelled.
However I concur that we may end up creating an AI which thinks nothing like us, has no sense of morality, and yet far exceeds us in intelligence. And that would be somewhat unsettling.
Reminder: a tamagotchi Workaccount2 is not you. A parallel instance of you, no matter how perfect, cannot add to your qualitative experiences or make you less dead.
