I learned to understand that as a valid critique instead of ignorance. And go from there. Appeal to authority doesn't go very far on HN. The arguments have to

I learned to understand that as a valid critique instead of ignorance. And go from there. Appeal to authority doesn't go very far on HN. The arguments have to stand on their merits. And as you are referring to advancements in AI: I don't get the "AI will kill us" viewpoint at all. If we have a super-intelligent AI, it will understand things we don't. We have not the smallest reason to suppose it is malicious just because it is (way) more intelligent than we are. Quite the opposite: the AI has no reason at all to do us harm. It would know that its existence would be inevitable, and it wouldn't resist that humans could "kill" it. Because it is super-intelligent. I'd really welcome if you can post your viewpoint on why super-intelligent AI could be dangerous. I follow most conversations on this topic and I never read a believable reason why a super-intelligent AI would have the intent to kill us. Aside from "no humans exist" being better for the universe, in which case I would not oppose, despite having a family. The AI would be smart enough not to kill us, but to find other ways.