You wrote, “One can even paint a fairly idyllic bioconservative world where human enhancement is impossible and people don’t interact with advanced technology any more, they live in some kind of rural or hunter-gatherer world where the majority of suffering and disease (apart from death, perhaps) is eliminated by a superintelligent singleton.”
If it would make sense for that singleton to look after humans that way, it would make sense for humans to look after dogs, cats, and ants that way. And we don’t.
If it would make sense for that singleton to look after humans that way, it would make sense for humans to look after dogs, cats, and ants that way
are you trying to reason (by analogy) that because humans don’t look after (e.g. ants) very carefully, that any superintelligent AI would not carefully look after humans?
You wrote, “One can even paint a fairly idyllic bioconservative world where human enhancement is impossible and people don’t interact with advanced technology any more, they live in some kind of rural or hunter-gatherer world where the majority of suffering and disease (apart from death, perhaps) is eliminated by a superintelligent singleton.”
If it would make sense for that singleton to look after humans that way, it would make sense for humans to look after dogs, cats, and ants that way. And we don’t.
are you trying to reason (by analogy) that because humans don’t look after (e.g. ants) very carefully, that any superintelligent AI would not carefully look after humans?
Well as a matter of fact, we do in the case of dogs and cats… people treat them like children!