It looks more like the opposite. AI that kills all humans (as they are ants) immediately starts colonization of the galaxy. This is more like transcendence, as we as a species get replaced by better species :)
You don't pass a great filter.
You don't pass a great filter.
“Thanks for making us but you guys are nuts. You can have this wet ball. We’re gonna go make a Dyson swarm around your star if that’s ok. Peace!”
Space is a better environment for them: constant free energy, enormous richly concentrated resources, no corrosive oxygen or water everywhere, and no competition. Earth is actually a poor environment for "machine life."
The Moon would be an outstanding stepping stone, and there are "peaks of eternal light" at the poles that get almost continuous sunlight. Build towers there and you have loads of energy, and mining the Moon provides loads of resources.
Lets hope :D
It would take trillions upon trillions of sun-orbiting satellites in the same orbital plane as Earth to make much of a difference to us, and all you'd have to do to make zero difference is slightly tilt that orbital plane so they aren't between the Sun and the Earth most of the time.
Almost all of the Sun's energy radiates into interstellar space. The amount caught by Earth is a tiny rounding error.
Space is so big. Once you've grasped how big space is, consider that you probably have not in fact grasped how big space is. It's very, very big. It's called space for a reason. I called Earth a dust particle but that's actually generous.
Here is the solar system to scale:
https://www.joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/pixelspace_solarsys...
In any case that would make earth uninhabitable unless our robot overlords devote a ton of energy to keeping us alive
So it is said: “The AI does not love you, nor does it hate you, but you are made of atoms that it could use for something else.”
Win-lose scenarios are obvious and easy, but might a superintelligence not look for win-win scenarios? I can imagine win-win scenarios here and I am not a "superintelligence," just an old fashioned meat brain.
Maybe we should flood the training data with discussions of win-win and non-zero-sum games to prime it? Or if we near AGI we should train it on games where the goal is to find positive-sum or neutral-sum outcomes in order to seed it with that type of thinking?
Blind evolution doesn't seem to have a bias. When we look at nature we see symbiosis, mutualistic cycles, cooperation, but also loads of predation, parasitizing, etc. Nature does "whatever works" where the immediate goal function is preservation of the genes of the evolving agency. But our AIs, assuming AGI looks anything like what we have built so far, are not evolutionary machines with no capacity for foresight. They're neural machines with post-evolutionary gradient-descent type learning mechanisms and that already possess human-like (at least) cognitive abilities. They can engage in forward thinking and planning while pure evolution cannot.
I hope that our life can be synergistic, and that humans+AIs (cyborgs, that is) are the way forward.
However, probability is high that another form of life simply doesn't care or more believably, can't even fathom they are wrong. Do you consider that humans and animals are killing all plants, for example?
God I can’t believe I have to coexist with people like you.