> the only way to ensure that human life continues as we know it is for AI to be banned
Is that because you think banned things do not happen? Even if the thing that is banned could confer a massive advantage to the entities developing it?
I think AGI is unlikely to be a thing in my lifetime, or even my children's. But if I were worried about it, I'd probably focus on developing a strategy to create a benevolent intelligence FIRST, rather than try to prevent everyone else from ever creating one via agreements and laws.
I appreciate that you actually suggest a solution. Nobody knows when AGI will come but it could come tomorrow. It could come in 1000 years. No harm in being proactive.
Developing a good ai first is useless because as I have said, the creation of ai enters us into an unstable configuration where bad ai will crop up regardless. Keeping bad ai from existing is infinitely easier when ai does not exist as a technology as opposed to when it’s a turnkey thing.
Is that because you think banned things do not happen? Even if the thing that is banned could confer a massive advantage to the entities developing it?
I think AGI is unlikely to be a thing in my lifetime, or even my children's. But if I were worried about it, I'd probably focus on developing a strategy to create a benevolent intelligence FIRST, rather than try to prevent everyone else from ever creating one via agreements and laws.