By quoting this segment, I inferred that you agreed with Greg.

If you disagree with Greg, then I apologize for inadvertently criticizing you personally.

My point stands, that we're back to debating some metaphysical understanding of what "real intelligence" is when the real standard should be "does it do a better job than humans at this specific task"?

I don't care if the Waymo isn't "truly" intelligent, it drives better than I do, that's a very good thing.

We're all pattern matchers, and if the machine pattern matcher is can find defects and vulns that human pattern matchers can't, that's also a very good thing.

Human brains don’t have a context window. The brain just constantly reconfigures itself on new input. The AI people call this “continuous learning” and believe it’s one of the most important things current AIs are missing.