sh461

It makes some sense to remove the term slave since it's a direct reference to slavery and there are a bunch of other terms that you can use which won't be offensive and will also be more descriptive and professional. Master on the other hand has multiple different uses and meanings most of which have nothing to do with slavery. Changing the naming of git branches seems like a massive overreaction, doesn't achieve anything substantial and it also sets a strange precedent in which one use case of a word damages all others.

Where's the demand for such a tool? If you have the experience and understanding to build a good back-end with a no-code tool, then you're already at a point where working with code isn't a problem for you.

<wild speculation>

AGI is not the same as human intelligence. It has the generality of human intelligence but since it isn't restricted by biology it can scale up much easier and can achieve superhuman performance in pretty much any individual task, group of tasks, or entire scientific or technological fields. That's pretty exciting.

</wild speculation>

<reality>

It's questionable whether the above is possible at all. In all likelihood none of us will see anything even remotely close to this in our lifetimes. We're currently so far away from it that we don't even know how to get started on solving such a problem. Nobody is currently working on this, despite how they're advertising their work.

</reality>

I guess what I'm saying isn't that AGI will be underwhelming, it's that it won't exist at all, at least as far as we are concerned.

Experience.

You're kind of conflating two different types of career change - switching tech stacks vs switching the domain in which you work. You could switch to a different web framework if you think Angular is becoming irrelevant (same domain, different tech stack). Or you could look for companies that run their ML on Java (familar tech stack, different domain). Yes, those companies do exist.

With either of those your past experience carries over to some extent. But if you decide that you want to be a data scientist and use Python, then you're putting yourself at massive disadvantage. First, because your past experience is far less relevant. Second, because there's a huge oversupply of beginner data science/ML people who use Python.

1. > We have no idea when AGI might appear.

We do know when it might not appear. This isn't a movie where AI is created by a single person in an afteroon because they had a creative thought. It's an effort by many people over a prolonged period of time. Everything that we know from decades of AI research tells us that it certainly doesn't exist and that we aren't close to discovering it. Also your common sense should tell you that if Google had AGI, they wouldn't currently get most of their revenue from ads and they wouldn't have a smaller market cap than a company that makes phones.

2. Your statement is non-falsifiable. It's similar to claiming that I wouldn't be surprised if humans have already been to Mars. It's an outrageous claim that no one can accurately disprove. Non-falsifiability is also a way some conspiracy theories spread. Because when someone says "No way" to such a claim (like the sibling comment), you can always respond with "How do you know?". Falsifiability separates science from non-science - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

> they're not forcing me to work these hours at all, but I think if you're a professional you can't avoid such circumstances sometimes and that's why we get $megabucks right?

No, you could make the exact opposite statement and it would sound just as valid. Watch:

"they're not forcing me to work these hours at all, and if you're a professional who does get the megabucks, you can avoid such circumstances."

The overwhelming probability is that none of us will see AGI in the span of our lives. The economic disruption is another thing - that can happen without AGI.

Also good to point out that the UK is about 8 times more densely populated than the US.