Partial disagree. There are absolutely intrinsically high-trust and intrinsically low-trust societies, and we have seen this WRT global issues like the environment. In some places, things like littering and dumping in rivers is “just what’s done”, and in others it is “just not done”, despite every nation having access to the same information about how bad it is to pollute the water supply. Group selection kind-of-works for humans because human groups can police their own very effectively over many generations. Most high trust societies today have a long history of executing a decent share of the population for crime and dishonorable behavior every generation.
That said, AI is low-salience for most people, and I think a substantial share of the people that care believe that descriptions of a threat are overblown. Among the remainder, you generally see programmers, engineers, politicians, and military planners rather than ordinary people, and those groups are much more inclined towards logical game-theoretic arguments than moral ones, even if the rest of the population leans the other way, simply because they either start their problem-solving process by mathing it out (programmers, engineers) or because they got where they are by being pragmatists (politicians, military planners).
Partial disagree. There are absolutely intrinsically high-trust and intrinsically low-trust societies, and we have seen this WRT global issues like the environment. In some places, things like littering and dumping in rivers is “just what’s done”, and in others it is “just not done”, despite every nation having access to the same information about how bad it is to pollute the water supply. Group selection kind-of-works for humans because human groups can police their own very effectively over many generations. Most high trust societies today have a long history of executing a decent share of the population for crime and dishonorable behavior every generation.
That said, AI is low-salience for most people, and I think a substantial share of the people that care believe that descriptions of a threat are overblown. Among the remainder, you generally see programmers, engineers, politicians, and military planners rather than ordinary people, and those groups are much more inclined towards logical game-theoretic arguments than moral ones, even if the rest of the population leans the other way, simply because they either start their problem-solving process by mathing it out (programmers, engineers) or because they got where they are by being pragmatists (politicians, military planners).