Agreed, I think this has been a useful discussion, and its good that we disagree sometimes. Otherwise our discussions become boring. But, I think we have explored this as far as we can for the moment.
So for @bryanlunduke and any other Jews using this site happy Hanukkah, For the Christians Merry Christmas and for everyone else I would like to wish you a good time and if you have a God may your god go with you.
I think everyone has been kind and understanding and as usual we can discuss complex and emotionally charged topics while maintaining a core of dignity and respect.
Agreed that I think we have all said about as much as we can. Thanks, @bryanlunduke, @oldgeek, @WarrenHill, and others for the discussion. 
Word. Letâs move on to something else Hawking is off-the-charts wrong about⌠
The more I think about it, the more I feel that AI really isnât that big of a threat to humanity â at least far less of a threat than so many other threats. Big giant rock hitting Earth. Crazy guy with nuclear weapons. Totally nice guy that goes to work a bit sleepy and accidentally pushes the wrong button. All of those seem a lot more likely (and scarier) to me.
Side note: Anyone else watch the trailer for the remake of Short Circuit⌠I mean âChappieâ yet? Seems relevant-ish.
Especially since what you guys refer to in the show is not AI, but machine learning. Hawking says AI, but AI research is actually very stagnant right now. Machine learning has zero chance of gaining self awareness. It is only more closely related to statistics than thought.
You keep saying this, but that doesnât necessarily make it so. As you say yourself, AI research is fairly stagnant because what people are generally talking about when they say âAIâ is machine learning â adaptive algorithms based on some sort of knowledge substrate, where providing that substrate is another function which falls under âAIâ. In my opinion, if weâre distinguishing AI and ML then doing so indicates that AI is an umbrella term for a bunch of different disciplines â thatâs a fine and reasonable distinction to draw, but going on to adversarially say that talking about machine learning and not AI is a âfoulupâ is in my opinion not. Thatâs why I didnât draw the distinction in the show; itâs meaningless as a distinction in this conversation. To the extent that people in general worry about the singularity happening, itâs because of algorithms adapting beyond the point we anticipate; nobodyâs worrying about a system for knowledge representation becoming self-aware, or NLP or computer vision systems evolving beyond what theyâre programmed to do. The whole point of the worry is that a system which is explicitly built to have the capability to grow in directions we canât a priori predict might grow in a direction we donât want it to; to the extent that that workâs being done under the AI banner, itâs being done in the machine learning bit of it.
Just a note of appreciation.
Before listening to this episode, the only thing that I knew the word âsingularityâ applied to was for black holes. So, I had to go look it up on the âbook of knowledgeâ (google) and found that word applies to many things including AI.
I have learned quite a few things by listening to BV. Iâve learned a few words thanks to @jeremy having the âword of the sheet toilet paperâ (according to @neuro, that is).
Seriously, though, Thanks!!
Perhaps a government education grant needs to be applied for to fund the show??
Now, on to the AI discussion.
I think that being able to emulate the brain is a very, very optimistic proposal. But, from what I understand, AI really doesnât need to emulate the brain to be a functional system, does it?
?!
Iâm not wanting to further this discussion, but I did want to say I found an email address to Stephen Hawking (I hope it is real and current. [email protected]) and sent the following email:
Dear Professor Hawking,
I have, recently, been involved in a discussion regarding a charge of antisemitism that has been laid upon you. This was due to your refusal to go to the Presidents conference in Israel last year, in support of the boycott against it. The discussion is found here: 1x31: Would you do it in the pouch?
While, in this discussion, there was accusations against you regarding this, some were saying that there is just not enough information regarding your views of Jews and the State of Israel to either justify such an accusation or to acquit you from them. And you probably know of the many accusations made on the internet.
I am inviting you to, please, make a statement regarding your stand on this issue. Having information would help resolve this.
Sincerely,
Greg
I hope doing this is okay with you all. I just felt it would be proper to give the professor (or his staff) an opportunity to express his views.
Will I get a response? Perhaps I shall start holding my breath! 
Ah 
Well, I immediately got the following auto-reply from Mr. Hawkings office:
Thank you for your email to Professor Hawking.
As you can imagine, Prof. Hawking receives many such every day. He very much regrets that due to the severe limitations he works under, and the enormous number of requests he receives, he is unable to compose a reply to every message, and we do not have the resources to deal with many of the specific scientific enquiries and theories we receive.
Please see the website http://www.hawking.org.uk for more
information about Professor Hawking, his life and his work.
Yours faithfully
Jonathan Wood
Technical Assistant to
Professor S W Hawking CH CBE FRS
Will I get further reply?? I await with great anticipation! 
I would love it if you get an empty email back with a single attachment with:
Canât believe you sent an email to The Hawk with âwould you do it in the pouchâ on the page and in the URL ⌠Ballsy.
LOVE IT.
More on Ello, its decline, and what they plan: http://venturebeat.com/2014/12/23/ello-hasnt-given-up-yet-site-redesign-and-mobile-apps-coming-in-2015/
More evidence on why physicists are probably not very worth listening to on matters of CS
On The Young Turks YouTube channel the Hawk is again worrying about AI saying that if machines become truly intelligent we are all doomed.
I can see a point here in that a truly intelligent non human: machine or alien would have no need for us. But, isnât he worrying about something that we are in no way near to be able to achieve in anything but the distant future if ever?
Yes.
All we know for sure is that the terminator runs Linux 