> No, actually the person asserting that a thing exists has the burden of proof.

Well, I'm not the one that made an assertion so I think both of you should provide some proof/evidence/support for your assertion. It doesn't matter if the assertion is for the existence of something or not. When you make an assertion you provide backing evidence to support it. Even for the assertion of nonexistence. This is basic stuff. Weird to even have to argue about it on HN. But just in case you never learned it, "There is no X" (your original assertion) is different from "There is no evidence for the existence of X".

> Easy. You have no evidence at all that the military has super advanced AI systems consumers don't have.

Okay I'll bite, we have access to project maven and knows exactly what it's capable of?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Maven https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2024-ai-warfare-project-m...

Okay sure, whatever you say. You clearly are privy to all of the projects the government is involved with, and surely while all of the consumer AI capabilities have been released they've been sitting around doing nothing with it like a deer in headlights.

Consumer AI has more data available to train off of than the government....right?

I'm sure the government just threw away all their AI projects and bought a chatgpt pro subscription because it's better or the same as what they are using with all the same capabilities...

What a silly position to take. Why did everybody foolishly make such a big deal about all the data they were collecting all these years