Otherwise it's going to be kind of a dice roll--what are the values of the first team to achieve the governance-eclipsing technology.
So like all history until now.
The winners dictate morality. Nothing will change.
For me, the most interesting revelation in the recent Wikileaks dumps is the surprising willingness of prominent individuals to share their most private thoughts via gmail.
Larry Page (or his unscrupulous AI successor) may already have enough blackmail material on hand to seize the levers of power, if he so chooses.
In that case, Google's new motto could be, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely".
My point is that exploring and conveying "morals" is actually one of the primary functions of literature. I can't tell if you agree or disagree with this. But if you believe that something being "fiction" means it's not worth paying attention to or that it cannot offer valid moral instruction, well, you are a tremendous fool.
Whether you agree or disagree with the moral or ethical argument being made is a completely separate point.
> That a moral lesson is taught through story does not make the moral taught true in any sense.
I never said that a moral lesson appearing in a story makes it "true". That's a stupid thing to even suggest. You are, however, suggesting that any moral lesson in any narrative that isn't "true" (would you mind sharing your definition of true so we can determine how we can come to that conclusion?) cannot contain a valid moral. Which is absurd.
To me this is the most plausible direction.
Personality characteristics, like "The Dark Triad/Tetrad," do a better job of explaining tendencies for misbehavior.
Edit: Oh! If you liked Daemon, check out Nexus. Same "problem", different core tech solution.