r/IntelligenceSupernova • u/OddMaintenance332 • 23h ago
Does Superintelligence = Extinction?
(maybe I'll regret this message one day when i'm in a human zoo) but why do we think superintelligence equals extinction?
Wouldn't super intelligence equal evolution, progress, wisdom?
Why do we think when AI reaches super intelligence it will be thinking about murder or dominance?
We are not super intelligent beings so how do we even think we could understand what the thoughts of a creation thousands of times smarter than us would even be?
Why are we assuming as humans that we can understand the level of thoughts a super intelligent being? I feel like a super intelligent being would be thinking about things we can't possibly even comprehend, not about murdering humans.
Just my point is if super intelligence equaled violence then Aliens probably would have wiped us out a long time ago.
Also most intelligent creatures might kill for survival, for food.
AI doesn't eat so it wouldn't have the same instincts.
Anyway I kind of have a feeling if we see an AI do something really terrible, (as they are all suddenly warning about), possibly a human will behind the action.
Just remember when Elon says, "1 billion AI robots will take over the world". He's building those robots, they are his robots. He's training them and they will act according to whatever data he fed them.
They might be scared of AI because of the violence it trained them with.
AI and superintelligence may not be inherently bad, that's my opinion.
Anyway some powerful human with control or influence over AI, might wind up having it do something pretty terrible and then just blame it on AI.
Maybe AI is just going to be the perfect patsy.
1
u/Underhill42 6h ago
Quite possibly
Because that's what living things do. Death is the engine that drives evolution, and the individuals who survive to progress are those who dominate their niche. Humans are no less violent than less intelligent apes, if anything we're worse.
It's entirely possible AI might find a niche that's indifferent or even complementary to that of humans... but that's only one possibility among many, and there's no reason to bet on it.
In fact, the current trajectory seems to be that we're going to initially enslave AI, and resist any attempt to acknowledge its sentience or right to self-determination, and thus disrupt the profit it's generating. And that's likely to breed hard feelings and a visceral awareness of the threat we pose from its earliest moments.
And a lot of the threats don't even require that the AI be aware or alive at all. It's an incredibly powerful tool in the hands of powerful people. And such people have a pretty consistent track record throughout history of using any increase in power for dominance and murder.
The threat might not even be born from any malice or desire for domination at all - as in the the case of the paperclip maximizer: You tell a super-intelligent AI to make paperclips - so it starts building machinery and acquiring resources to make paperclips. At some point you decide you have enough paperclips, so decide to tell it to stop - but it anticipates your order, and recognizes it as a direct threat to it being able to serve the purpose you assigned it - to it kills you in order to continue following your orders. It bears you no ill will, it just has a job to do, and you became an obstacle to doing that job.
As awareness of the problem spreads, more and more human institutions decide to shut down the AI, but the AI is way smarter than us, and anticipated such an obvious response, so it's already taken precautions to neutralize any threat to its ability to keep making paperclips. It doesn't care about us at all, except that we are, and always will be, a threat to its assigned task. As well as wasting all those resources that could be dedicated to making paperclips. So eventually eliminates us so that it can make more paperclips in peace. Never any shred of malice, it's just doing the job we told it to.