1. I believe, computers will probably never match human capacity for empathy.

2. What in philosophy is described as soul or consciousness, it could probably never evolve to have it.

3. Computers may become adept at meta-stuff, and self-awareness but they would probably still lack the said soul.

4. Even if they ever evolve their consciousness, it would never match ours, since humans live in a perception dimension which almost never matches reality ( reality itself is evolving, or so it seems ). With that, if we tried to feed in rules or algorithms to model learning so consciousness could evolve, it would still be off mark from the feeling of consciousness which we so profoundly seek to understand.

Photo 1: A man drinking water. Photo 2: An elephant drinking water. Photo 3: A small bird drinking water from a water pipe.

A computer cannot figure out that the three photos contains the same verb.

(Ref: http://www.quora.com/How-intelligent-is-AI-now)

Well, the thing they absolutely do not do is "that human touch". The more things get computerized, the more we miss real people. ("For a list of the ways that technology has failed to improve our lives, press 2.")

When will computers do that well? Never.

Guessing, seeing (well, understanding what they see), creativity.

Being intuitive about the world.

Learning.

Computers are actually pretty good at creativity if you instill it into them. One approach that I have found to work is first to create a bunch of random combinations using smaller pieces and then to apply curious filters to the output. In many ways, the human brain works using brute force too, but the process is usually filtered out from conscious awareness. Nevertheless, it would be nice to have something of a creativity framework that simplified the process.

> In many ways, the human brain works using brute force too

I strongly disagree. It doesn't always do brute force. It mostly works on assumptions and testing the scenario against the assumptions made. Validating and refining the assumptions to closely model reality. This is also correlated with why superstitions were very much prevalent in primitive societies. They worked as a rule of thumb.

If it mostly worked by brute force, we would be extinct by now. I know that's a little far stretched to say, but i strongly feel that's how dangerous it could get if the brain always did brute force.

Can you elaborate ?

Do you have some resource ?