> "Computing as an intelligence augmenter" seemed to be a really popular viewpoint through the 70s and 80s (even in corporate advertisements for computing devices). Then it somehow got co-opted by "computing as a medium for passive entertainment and video games", and then eventually as "a medium for social networking".
This is probably a demonstration that intelligence only gets you so far and isn't really that useful in life. Nerds don't like this because intelligence is what they value in themselves; that's why so many of them think that if "artificial general intelligence" was invented that is "superintelligent" it would somehow also have superpowers and be able to invent viruses, convince anyone of anything, etc.
But how's it going to do that? Just imagine them really hard? What part about being able to think really fast says any of those thoughts are accurate?
Basically, computing technology is good at creating virtual worlds of logic, but it's much harder to affect the real world with it.
This is probably a demonstration that intelligence only gets you so far and isn't really that useful in life. Nerds don't like this because intelligence is what they value in themselves; that's why so many of them think that if "artificial general intelligence" was invented that is "superintelligent" it would somehow also have superpowers and be able to invent viruses, convince anyone of anything, etc.
But how's it going to do that? Just imagine them really hard? What part about being able to think really fast says any of those thoughts are accurate?
Basically, computing technology is good at creating virtual worlds of logic, but it's much harder to affect the real world with it.
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravec%27s_paradox.