3 pointsby tndibona6 hours ago1 comment
  • humblefactory6 hours ago
    How do you reach your first conclusion? Can you give a more detailed logical explanation, or cite a source? To be clear, I agree with your conclusion, but I think I would get there via a different logical path.
    • tndibona3 hours ago
      The first conclusion is just a product of my thoughts in the morning shower that’s all. It goes like this. Supreme intelligence can’t be programmed to serve the less intelligent. Which is what we’re trying to do with AI. Basically we’re trying to slap rules to an intelligence that is poised to be orders of magnitude greater than us. Take dogs for example. We’re smarter than them by several quantum orders. It’s not as if we serve them at our own expense. We’ve basically taken over their evolution. How do we expect anything different from ai ? Thats my reasoning.
    • tndibona3 hours ago
      Or rather another way I concluded it is - we might have a very narrow idea of the ways in which ai can be harmful. We still worry about the job losses, etc. regardless of how we organize ourselves in society, a super intelligent ai could easily conclude every possible way ai could be harmful to humans. So the only logical course of action for the ai would be to terminate itself.