If Bobber didn't try to generalize from one very specific and limited form of research to the wider world, I might give his opinion greater weight. You seem to think enough baby steps in computer science will eventually replace the intelligent application of the human computer. While you have a great deal of company in these forums, you're all wrong.
No matter how great the fervent hopes of basement dwellers across the globe are who yearn for the halcyon days of never having to interact directly with another human being while, having every fantasy delivered directly to their brain by fiber optic implants, believes it to be the ultimate freedom, those of us who can still think will tuck you in, wipe the drool from your mouth and, go on building real accomplishments while you dream.
Sure, why not? We're organic computers that use cells to store and process information. I very much doubt that that is
the best possible way of making an intelligent entity, and I certainly hope that we are not the most intelligent things that will ever come from this planet.
You seem to think human computing has something to do with wires and code, 1's and 0's.
Emergent properties.
Your brain is a bunch of cells, exchanging and storing information by forming connections and exchanging chemicals. We tend to look at a brain as something more, something supremely special, but it's still just a bunch of cells doing simple things. Our intelligence is an emergent property of that collection, a nice accident that happened when our brains became absurdly large and capable when compared to anything else that came about in nature.
Our brains can store exceptionally elaborate models of our environment, and included in that model is knowledge of its own existence - self-awareness. We also discovered a cheat-code that no other animal regularly uses: Written symbolic language. It allowed us to overcome the hurdle of death's destruction of accumulated experience and information. We were able to use that to build and disseminate knowledge, generation after generation, and amass an extraordinary amount of technological capability.
I don't see a good reason that an artificial computer system couldn't accomplish the same thing, once given adequate resources for processing, data storage, and flexibility.
Computer science will always be limited to the parameters input by programmers. Programmers can't even relate to family, women or, a world without electronic technology and you think they can create something greater than themselves? OTOH, if there's a chance for true AI (which I don't believe there is) it'll be Liberal Arts major who does it.
Oh, right, I forgot. Programmers and computer scientists are all borderline sociopaths.
.