I don’t think the actual content of what I invented is so vital to the point that I’d want to dox this account to use it to prove that inventions are hugely dependent and on prior progress, that there isn’t a magical leap of intuition. I think reading a random sampling of patents can show that. Here’s a random start. https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/11587362

And if there are any inventions that you think about as being truly without logical antecedent feel free to share.

I just think that moment of inventive inspiration is not more than the human brain finally connecting the requisite pieces of information in a new way, and extrapolating. It wouldn’t be the most efficient way, but there’s no reason that I know of that a random information subsetting and then considering algorithm can’t do that. And computers can put in long hours for cheap.

I think people, and I’m not saying you necessarily, believe that humans have a special that lets them invent. Something that AI can’t learn. Which is a different claim from “haven’t” learned yet. I think eternal human dominance is a comforting hypothesis, but one that doesn’t have any data to back it up. If humans are so good at inventing, why can’t they invent something that is also just as good or way better at invention?