LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
  • leweb
    +5

    Stephen Hawking is an optimist. He always says that a hyper-intelligent AI would be disastrous. But what's the alternative? The way we're going, we're about to devise our own extinction via global warming, nuclear holocaust, various Malthusian catastrophes, etc. sooner or later. Being replaced by a highly intelligent AI would actually be better, in that there will be some sort of legacy from humankind that will live on. We might actually get lucky and be able to survive as pets, although a smart enough AI will probably not care about pets.

    We're all gonna die anyway, so who cares if we die of mundane causes or we die to give way to a superior intelligence? Given a choice I'd prefer for (actual) intelligence to go on.

    • cunt
      +2

      We need a right good old fashioned war or pestilence otherwise the world will become overcrowded

      Plus, wars create jobs just like race tracks help the glue industry