Lol what? Since when is asserting "finite resources will eventually be unable to sustain exponential growth" disproven by observing that "Yeah, well, they haven't yet"?
100 years is virtually no time at all, I'm having a hard time believing you're not making a joke with your optimism being that you think we have at least that long.
I don't know why you're so skeptical that a drug possessing the primary effect of flooding one's brain with serotonin can cause SSRI withdrawal symptoms upon cessation.
As for whether or not it's 'really MDMA', not everybody is popping pressed ecstasy tablets. It's trivial to send a few crushed crystals to a spectroscopy lab and I very rarely see samples cut with anything other than carbohydrates.
On the other side of the same coin, when animating VFX for live action, animation which looks "too clean" is also a failure mode. You want to make your poses a little less good for camera, introduce a little bit of grime and imperfection, etc.
Animation is a great art and it takes a lot of skill to make things look the way they ought to for whatever it is you are trying to achieve.
Most animators don't like the "digital makeup" comparison (because it's often used in a way which feels marginalizing to their work on mocap-heavy shows), but if you interpret it in the sense that makeup makes people look the way they are "supposed to" I think it's a good model for understanding why rotoscope and motion capture don't yet succeed without them.
In what respect is generating text a better predictor of real world applicability than the ability to achieve goals in a complex simulated environment containing other agents?
Have you seen what other people were painting in the early 1500s? Leonardo's work is extraordinary for his time. Comparing the Mona Lisa with later art is a bit like measuring somebody while you're standing on their shoulders.
"It's opensource, so it is going to be a better engine in the long run." Citation needed.