There are two main kinds of “take over the world” I think people have in mind:
You have some level of authority over the entire world, but still have humanlike constraints. Think politics, human-scale game theory, the kind of “control” that e.g. Napoleon would’ve had over the French Empire at its height. Like, sure, the buck stops with him, but if he appointed his brother to King Of X and that brother was committed to a bad decision, Napoleon might not be able to really stop him. Presumably, the depth of control exercised by a leader or small group would be lower for a larger area controlled.
Cartoonish totalitarian in-depth control over the entire world. Think nanobots, mind-control, near-total surveillance. The version we should be scared of with A.I. Debatably the only version that would be game-changingly useful to whichever entity or group got it.
There are two main kinds of “take over the world” I think people have in mind:
You have some level of authority over the entire world, but still have humanlike constraints. Think politics, human-scale game theory, the kind of “control” that e.g. Napoleon would’ve had over the French Empire at its height. Like, sure, the buck stops with him, but if he appointed his brother to King Of X and that brother was committed to a bad decision, Napoleon might not be able to really stop him. Presumably, the depth of control exercised by a leader or small group would be lower for a larger area controlled.
Cartoonish totalitarian in-depth control over the entire world. Think nanobots, mind-control, near-total surveillance. The version we should be scared of with A.I. Debatably the only version that would be game-changingly useful to whichever entity or group got it.