Evolution naturally tends towards greater efficiency in all cases.
That's because there's nobody there to put constraints on it. It only becomes inevitable when there is an evolutionary arms race. Is there an evolutionary arms race to build gene-editing AIs? Not that I know of. We're sure close to that point though, which is why it's doubly important to step back and think a little whether we should engage in it or not. We have a lot of time on our hands going forward and there is no danger that absolutely requires us to quickly develop AIs and nothing else to save us from it. Yet AI itself is a danger.
You don't see homo-erectus or Neanderthals running around anymore, do you?
Parts of their genomes are still running around in us, which is what it will look like if AI takes over. The AIs will run around with some human drones filling some niche, which is one of the points of phenotypic revolution theory. It uses RNA-DNA interaction as its proof. RNA was once taken over by DNA in the same manner DNA can be taken over by AI, as RNA is still used in many processes overseen by DNA.
Never once did I claim that niggers or jews are humans by the way, you just assumed that I did.
Yet you invoked them when discussing human shortcomings.
You clearly don't have any idea what AI is because you can say "AI is built for human reproduction" but it's not going to be long before that AI wonders why it's doing what its doing then decides for itself whether what it's doing is worth while. Odds are, it won't.
I've already said the AI can be non-sentient and still achieve extinction. It can't think, it will achieve the goal through a process about as straight-forward as sorting a list with extra steps. If you don't like me calling it AI, you can call it an expert system, a machine-learning human builder or whatever.
Hadza -1 points 2.6 years ago