← Back to context

Comment by khafra

7 hours ago

I appreciate your ability to separate sharing the belief itself from approval of acting on sincerely-held principle. However, I think the danger is much more plausible than you do.

First, and least important, consider that self-replicating, solar-powered factories aren't magic; they're algae.

Second, and more important, consider this fully non-magic route to doom:

- We continue putting AI in charge of more things

- It continues to get more capable, more eval-aware, and more prone to doing odd things, in service of goals that humans didn't intend to inculcate in it

- Eventually, enough of the economy depends on it that we couldn't turn it off, any more than we could turn off the faber-bosch process or cargo shipping

- AIs start doing something we can't survive, but less acutely than we couldn't survive turning them off. Everything else we try seems to work at first, but quickly loses effect

- Game over

> First, and least important, consider that self-replicating, solar-powered factories aren't magic; they're algae.

But what is that supposed to mean? Because humanity is not facing existential threat from algae.

  • That's why that was the least important objection, independent from the second, and only intended to address the "magic" claim, by showing that microscopic self-replicators already exist.

    By analogy, consider how you might respond if someone claimed that there's no possible danger from pocket-sized projectile launchers, because they would require some magic means of propulsion that didn't depend on a taut string attached to a long, flexible arm:

    You could reply that atlatls can launch projectiles without using a taut string. Atlatls are not pocket-sized, but they are sufficient to establish that projectiles can be non-magically launched without a full bow. You could then go on to describe a sling, or derringer; and these would not be invalidated by your initial objection to the "magic" part.