Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's rarely productive to take internet criticism into account, but it feels like AI is an especially strong instance of this. It seems like a lot of folks just want to pooh pooh any possible outcome. I'm not sure why this is. Possibly because of animosity toward big tech, given big tech is driving a lot of the research and practical implementation in this area?
AI has been over-hyped, that's all. The machine learning techniques that were developed and enhanced during the last decade are not magical, like any other machines/software. But people have different and irrational expectations about AI.
You might be using a different definition of "magical" than what others are using in this context.
Of course, when you break down ML techniques, it's all just math running on FETs. So no, it's not extra-dimensional hocus pocus, but absolutely nobody is using that particular definition.
We've seen unexpected superhuman performance from ML, and in many cases, it's been inscrutable to the observer as to how that performance was achieved.
Think move 37 in game #2 of Lee Sedol vs. AlphaGo. This move was shocking to observers, in that it appeared to be "bad", but was ultimately part of a winning strategy for AlphaGo. And this was all done in the backdrop of sudden superhuman performance in a problem domain that was "safe from ML".
When people use the term "magic" in this context, think of "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" mixed with the awe of seeing a machine do something unexpected.
And don't forget, the human brain is just a lump of matter that consumes only 20W of energy to achieve what it does. No magic here either, just physics. Synthetically replicating (and completely surpassing) its functionality is a question of "when", not "if".