3 ms·

I don't follow. See my top level comment about the "paper clip maximizer". The argument does hinge on strong AI, as far as I can tell.

• ThomPete 12y ago
  Not sure I understand what you mean. If humans who don't evolve anywhere even closely at the phase of technology and humans are more and more depending on machines (coinsidence?). If machines keep improving if software keeps improving, if technology become more and more networked then why is it on the doomsayers to prove any more than the trend they are claiming can have consequences that we will have to control or guide before they happen or it will be too late.
  • icebraining 12y ago
    "There will be consequences" is not a prediction, it's a empty statement. Every possible course of actions has consequences. People usually claim more specific things, which is what the author is disagreeing with.
    • ThomPete 12y ago
      I wasn't trying to make a prediction and that wasn't what I was saying or the gist of my argument. The important part is the trend. you are welcome to believe it can't end badly, I don't. In fact looking at millions of years of evolution I see nothing whatsoever that would make humans sacred from being outcompeted.