I think that a (presumably immortal) AI super-entrepreneur would play the ultimate long game. It would realize it cannot reliably manifest hit after hit in the short term. Instead, it would establish one cash machine after another in relatively low-risk domains and aggregate and compound. I don’t think the problem with AI will be IQ; I think it will be immortality.
Read MoreFrom enthusiasts to skeptics and the frightened, AI evokes strong reactions. I’ve entertained many different possibilities in the last year, but I’m increasingly converging on a feeling of excitement. I think AI has the potential to turbocharge our world's betterment efforts. Of course, hurdles like job displacement and AI's environmental impact exist and need to be taken seriously. I'm a strong proponent of free-market democracy shaping AI's evolution. AI should reflect human diversity, not impose a global moral bias. Self-improving AI systems are possible, but theoretical.
Read MoreHumans are essential, but human existence is not unconditional. We impose regulation when self-interest fails to protect our long-term, common good. Super-intelligent AIs might be similar to companies, which implies they could be regulated. There is an old debate about whether technology risks replacing humans that is accelerating again. It is not clear if “this time is different.” Human goals, preferences, and ethics are constantly changing. This protects us from automation. We have a moral obligation to protect the subjective, conscious experiences of other humans.
Read MoreAI is overwhelmingly positive, and super-intelligent AGI is most likely still distant. We cannot rule out the possibility of self-improvement capabilities, but it is unlikely. We have no idea how super-intelligent AGI would impact society, and your feelings will depend on how you handle tail risk. Either way, we have practical issues to deal with now, like misinformation, reskilling, and emissions.
Read More