Hopefully this is good news for Bing.
That's what seems so confusing about HN replies here. (Non-friendly) AGI is an extreme existential risk (depending on who you listen to).
I'm perfectly fine with rewarding the org that's responsible for researching friendly AGI to do it _right_ (extremely contingent on that last bit).
You know, I can't prove that researchers being funded is the best way of figuring out how to do things, but I have a gut intuition that tells me that.
I'll look into it so that I'm not just blindly suggesting that $$ ==> people ==> research ==> progress.
Thanks for the opportunity to reflect!
The precedent for general intelligence is not good. The only example we know of (ourselves) is a known existential threat.