And you would think that remaining without tools could be better? Like in Rousseau's ideal? Such as "It is the fault of the people of Lisbon if they were crushe

And you would think that remaining without tools could be better? Like in Rousseau's ideal? Such as "It is the fault of the people of Lisbon if they were crushed in the earthquake: they should have never left the forest, no buildings to collapse on them"? Rousseau did not seem to notice that forests can be effing damp and cold. If tools started with the Homo Habilies well over two million years ago, it meant that inventing butchery was advantageous. Even "lymbically", as they found it preferable - surely emotionally preferable - than hunger, waste etc. We have been doing AI for a long time: and we quite normally meant "virtual professional". ("Computer" means "virtual computer [(the job)]"; "AI" stands for "virtual computer [(the job)] with less mechanical, routinary tasks".) This "«agency or self preservation goals»" idea is practically not impossible but an "holliwoodian" drift of the debate - entertaining thoughts replacing practical ones. If people act badly because of lack of wisdom, because of the hiatus between technological advance and personal advance (as we have been noticing at least for the past three centuries): they shall cultivate themselves. We do. Ignorance is societally the most massive problem, but it is a different problem. (Edit: sorry, not just and precisely "different": it is a related problem, because in fact we use Intelligence to acquire Wisdom. Intelligence is that thing that dissipates ignorance... That makes it a value. Synthetic, real Intelligence is meant to help against the devastating ignorance around.) That people fall from ladders or use them to hit people in the streets is not a sufficient note to suggest we should do without ladders - and lose the inherent perks.