I just got done reading this New Yorker article yesterday: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/05/14/how-frightened-should-we-be-of-ai https://www.newyorke

I just got done reading this New Yorker article yesterday: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/05/14/how-frightened-should-we-be-of-ai https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/05/14/how-frightened... China's social credit system is glossed in the article. Doesn't seem like there are a lot of good outcomes where AI is involved. A passage near the end of the article: In the meantime, we need a Plan B. Bostrom’s [author of book Superintelligence] starts with an effort to slow the race to create an A.G.I. [Artificial General Intelligence] in order to allow more time for precautionary trouble-shooting. Astoundingly, however, he advises that, once the A.G.I. arrives, we give it the utmost possible deference. Not only should we listen to the machine; we should ask it to figure out what we want. The misalignment-of-goals problem would seem to make that extremely risky, but Bostrom believes that trying to negotiate the terms of our surrender is better than the alternative, which is relying on ourselves, “foolish, ignorant, and narrow-minded that we are.” Tegmark [author of book Life 3.0: Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence] also concludes that we should inch toward an A.G.I. It’s the only way to extend meaning in the universe that gave life to us: “Without technology, our human extinction is imminent in the cosmic context of tens of billions of years, rendering the entire drama of life in our Universe merely a brief and transient flash of beauty.” We are the analog prelude to the digital main event. Takes the idea of moving fast and breaking things to the next level.