4 ms·
Sure, even nuclear annihilation is asymmetric - the amount you spend on making the bombs is much less than the amount you can destroy with them. But that doesn'
by Imnimo 3y ago
Sure, even nuclear annihilation is asymmetric - the amount you spend on making the bombs is much less than the amount you can destroy with them. But that doesn't automatically imply that there are routes to global destruction that are arbitrarily cheap.
The implication seems to be that the superintelligent AI will somehow figure out a way to destroy the world that requires significantly less than the "huge capital and expertise" needed for the nuclear scenario. But that's a critical assumption that requires justification, not something to be left as an exercise to the reader.
- pixl97 3y agoHow much does, and/or will genetic manipulation cost in the future? Bio-terrorism is a potential massive risk as proliferation of technologies for customized gene therapies continually develop. If you have the tooling and knowledge to make rice have a bountiful crop, then it's highly likely this skillset easily transfers to dramatically affecting the rice crop via disease. Could a genetic scientist do this now? Likely possible, but if you have a scientist in a box with no ethics and all the time in the world, you're apt to get pretty far.