>Well, that's the capital equipment case then. Is it really a general intelligence if you don't let it be general? It can't handle every possible scenario for y

>Well, that's the capital equipment case then. Is it really a general intelligence if you don't let it be general? It can't handle every possible scenario for you that way. Humans are most useful to other humans as happy slaves. Autonomy only is good for humans as individuals. If we create useful agi of course we will bend it to our will. There is no incentive to make AI as a separate competitor other than an experiment. Either way this is hypothetical. >If your theory is that someone will program an AGI for the specific goal of making you unemployed, sure that could happen. But it sounds more like warfare than economics to me at that point, so I can't comment cause I don't know too much about that. No it's cost saving. I don't want to employ someone who I have to pay. This is capitalism. I save money by using AI. >Where's the data? That was pure theory there, I didn't make any empirical claims. You don't need to cite your sources. It's obvious you're getting your conclusions from data. You use the words "in practice". I agree with you on how the data plays out. >It's important to do this because approximately all AGI doom on the internet comes from Big Yud, an internet cult founder who thinks you can predict the future by thinking about it really hard and doing probability theory in your head without needing to check any assumptions. Which is why he thinks AGI is going to enslave him, because it's on a computer so it can do math exponentially faster, never mind that it can't do real world experiments to test anything. No it's not. AI doom saying comes from everywhere. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpoRO378qRY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpoRO378qRY (the godfather of modern AI, is concerned about doom). Either way, you shouldn't counter something with extremities that are simply opposite in nature. You should counter something you disagree with, with actual truth, Even if that truth doesn't fully dismiss the idea and calls only for naunce.