I do think it’s fair to describe this as the ‘standard argument’.
Is this ‘standard argument’ valid? We only argue that is problematic.
If this argument is invalid, what would a valid argument look like? Perhaps with a ‘sufficient probability’ of high risk from instrumental intelligence?
I do think it’s fair to describe this as the ‘standard argument’.
Is this ‘standard argument’ valid? We only argue that is problematic.
If this argument is invalid, what would a valid argument look like? Perhaps with a ‘sufficient probability’ of high risk from instrumental intelligence?