Why do people keep saying their opinions as if they are fact? Whether or not I refuted your point is independent from your assertions of such.
> Both technologies provide utility that is not all-encompassing.
No. Crypto provides no utility. At all. AI provides a lot of utility, some of the time.
And you know what, you're wrong. AI is a panacea. It's called general purpose transformer ffs. And not by marketers, but by actual engineers who developed the Transformer architecture. (Obviously I'm being a little facetious but AI is infinitely more of a cure-all than crypto)
> What's the number of people who have been murdered by AI?
The second most common use case of crypto is for anonymous transactions for illegal drugs and weapons. So that's all I'm going to say on that point.
Crypto's killer feature is being an open standard for finance that anyone can integrate with. Having a use case in drug and weapons transactions is still utility though, you're disagreeing with yourself
Ai doesn't do anything you couldn't hire a person to do, and you still need a expert person to vet it's outputs, so I think it also provides no utility?
That's just blatantly untrue. If there is anything you cannot do with normal money, cryptocurrency has utility. You can argue that it's overall negative utility or insignificant compared to the glory of AI (you may be right) but utility is inherent to any system of payment with more than 1 participant.
> AI is a panacea. It's called general purpose transformer ffs.
That's more than just a little facetious. AI generates text - it does nothing other than that. It's admittedly great at manipulating text, but that's where it's "general purpose transforming" stops. It encodes human concepts like emotions and spatial reasoning into words, which are incomplete analogs to how they work in the real world. It has impressive results, but comparing the value of human labor to the work AI can do is startlingly parallel to comparing the value of a database to the work a blockchain can do. It almost provides the basis for reality-distortion to investors, which is where those "marginal utility" AI/crypto companies come from.
> The second most common use case of crypto is for anonymous transactions for illegal drugs and weapons
The first most common use case of AI is for military purposes.
I will refer you to the Vision Transformer: https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.11929
I suggest you do a literature review on the applications of ANNs, CNNs and attention mechanisms. They are quite numerous but I will concede that they generally 'just' do compression.
AI encodes human concepts like emotions and spatial reasoning into vectors. Which, their analogous-ness to the real world, is more of a philosophical question than a practical one at this point.
> It has impressive results, but comparing the value of human labor to the work AI can do is startlingly parallel to comparing the value of a database to the work a blockchain can do.
I mean 'human labor' is a very general thing, compared to 'database' IMO.
> The first most common use case of AI is for military purposes.
This is true but the AI that the military uses is probably a far cry from what the public is able to access - and not from a technological advancement but a specificity standpoint. The military will want deterministic, non-opaque methods that are probably closer to the policy-gradient recommendation systems of old. Think Netflix and TikTok, not GPT.
I can say from an investor standpoint AI is probably a bubble but only because its entire foundations are open source. There's no money to be made from it, therefore it's a bubble.
Crypto on the other hand always had somewhat dubious foundations. There are few use cases for it, therefore it's a bubble.
As I insisted in my last comment - I couldn't give less of a shit about the success of either technology. Comments like this though:
> One adds wealth to society. The other redistributes existing wealth.
...make no sense. You're sounding equally as absurd as the people who insist on the opposite being true.
> The number of people who have been defrauded by AI are zero.
What's the number of people who have been murdered by AI? It's a much more dubious figure, but a larger one to be sure. If you want to move the goalpost to which one is more harmful, I still think you hamstring your attack on cryptocurrency.