Is artificial intelligence even possible?

Yeah, I get you. Consciousness is a pretty abstract concept that is hard to pin down. So just about everytime you discuss it, the person you discuss it with is likely to have a unique definition that makes an intelligent conversation on it difficult. 

Correct

Just struck me as an interesting turn of phrase.

And I would suggest that what you were actually referring to was an inherent predeterminism that negates our ability to self determine

Though isn't the human condition such that we have evolved, beyond a complete lack of self determination.

Or do I have no control over why and what I type in response to your post?

I'm pretty sure that we are able choose, though I suppose that testing this theory would be a tad difficult, if not impossible.

AI will kill us all

Long but worthy read

Thanks I'll check it out

I've never heard of the Chinese Room before your mention of it. The distinction to me, of biological v. artificial intelligence, is not explained via a Q&A format as Searle proposed, and demonstrated in the video in your link. It is, rather, whether AI can be as naturally creative as can BI [biological intelligence]. Could the Chinese Room experiment change the conditions of the test were AI in the room instead of BI, such as by Star Trek's Kobayashi Moru? Could AI, presented with the phrase in Chinese characters, "Do you speak Chinese?" reply, also in Chinese characters, "Among the languages I speak are English, French, Japanese, and Arabic." Such is the conundrum of a creative artist, or writer, or musician. There is an answer, and it does communicate clearly, but it is not the expected reply to a yes/no question, does not acknowledge Chinese as one of the languages [although it could be, and just was not mentioned], and it is clearly not rote, as one may expect, so far, from AI. I don't think "disprove" is proper interpretation. On its own, I think a true AI/BI match will not occur on the effort of AI. With the assist of BI, it is possible to come very close to equality of ability, because I place no limit on the ability of BI expansion into infinity. However, the variables involved in the linkage in one man's mind to see pattern recognition, such as Picasso's representation of a bicycle handle bar to a bull's horns, and further to link both images as representative of parts of greater wholes as a transportation devices, or as potential racing rivals, is going to be a challenge for AI.

The Chinese box suggests a one-to-one table for every possible input, having an action for everything, but no true knowledge. Neural networks such as AlphaGo don't work this way, but instead develop complex patterns in their responses to stimuli.

I know, the Chinese Room may not have actual knowledge about Chinese, but AI is still AI. AI is still defined as an AI even if it exhibits no actual intelligence. You won't call North Korea Democratic, but it is in its name. AI doesn't need to exhibit actual human-like intelligence. 

If I had a program like the Chinese Room, I might call it an AI, but not all AIs work this way. A neural network applies patterns, which is more general and is closer to how humans think. 

My point is that even if there are AIs like the Chinese Room, they aren't the only kind, so I believe that Artificial Intelligence is possible, yes.

Don Trumpet proves AI exists is USA white house.