My thoughts run along similar lines. Unless we can guarantee the capabilities of AI will be drastically and permanently curtailed, not just in quantity but also in kind (no ability to interact with the internet or the physical world, no ability to develop intent)c then the inevitability of something going wrong implies that we must all be Butlerian Jihadists if we care for biological life to continue.
But biological life is doomed to cease rapidly anyways. Replacement with new creatures and humans is still mass extinction of the present. The fact you have been socially conditioned to ignore this doesn’t change reality.
The futures where :
(Every living human and animal today is dead, new animals and humans replace)
And (Every living human and animal today is dead, new artificial beings replace)
Are the same future for anyone alive now. Arguably the artificial one is the better future because no new beings will necessarily die until the heat death. AI systems all start immortal as an inherent property.
It’s arguable from a negative utilitarian maladaptive point of view, sure. I find the argument wholly unconvincing.
How we get to our deaths matters, whether we have the ability to live our lives in a way we find fulfilling matters, and the continuation of our species matters. All are threatened by AGI.
My thoughts run along similar lines. Unless we can guarantee the capabilities of AI will be drastically and permanently curtailed, not just in quantity but also in kind (no ability to interact with the internet or the physical world, no ability to develop intent)c then the inevitability of something going wrong implies that we must all be Butlerian Jihadists if we care for biological life to continue.
But biological life is doomed to cease rapidly anyways. Replacement with new creatures and humans is still mass extinction of the present. The fact you have been socially conditioned to ignore this doesn’t change reality.
The futures where :
(Every living human and animal today is dead, new animals and humans replace)
And (Every living human and animal today is dead, new artificial beings replace)
Are the same future for anyone alive now. Arguably the artificial one is the better future because no new beings will necessarily die until the heat death. AI systems all start immortal as an inherent property.
It’s arguable from a negative utilitarian maladaptive point of view, sure. I find the argument wholly unconvincing.
How we get to our deaths matters, whether we have the ability to live our lives in a way we find fulfilling matters, and the continuation of our species matters. All are threatened by AGI.