Alexander Chislenko wrote:
> On the other hand, AIs could probably design a very consistent code that
> they would require humans to follow. Since well-backed-up AIs should be
> immortal, this code will probably require that humans do not inflict
> economic damage on AIs possessions - or else. And since inefficient use
> of resources by clumsy and slow humans should be rationally classified as
> damage or waste, some kind of 'else' scenario - restricting human activity
> to a level proportional to people's [rapidly diminishing] value - seems
> inevitable...
"Robots shall inherit the earth, and they *better* be us"...OR ELSE! Heavily relying on the benevolence of superior beings is not the best way to live long and prosper.