John is the perfect representation of what is wrong with peoples attitude toward AGI. aloof and naive.
John is the perfect representation of what is wrong with peoples attitude toward AGI. aloof and naive.
Because that's really where the line of human history will be drawn if AGI and above becomes real. AI safety, how advanced we are in it, will directly map to civilization's progress or endangerment as a result of AI.
Edit: this is already true with regards to "psychological safety" from undue influence or outright manipulation with motive (usually financial) by current "ANI" algorithms (newsfeeds, "recommendations", ads, etc). It's a real topic that reduces to human psychological freedom, freewill. It's a BIG topic.
Probably? I do not think that word means what you think it means... or else I don't think the balance of probability lies where you think it does.
I know of several million species that would strongly disagree. Especially if AGIv1 decides to tune the genetics of say most mammals to append 'sapient' to the end of their species name.
Perhaps more constructively consider that AGI is simply the next iteration of 'humanity', yea sure the old versions are redundant anarchisms and apart from some living reserve specimens functionally extinct, but nobody cares as you can sim one up at almost no cost.