I think it just goes to show how powerful TV still is. If this wasn't being broadcast on the news channels daily then it would just be a fringe conspiracy. Now it's taken as absolute fact by so many people that you cannot question it.

It's funny because it's actually easy to explain how and why. Billionaires will give the AI orders to kill the excess population. Which will be before and/or after they give the AI orders to kill all foreign nations refusing to submit to imperialism. China will naturally defend itself because they already have the same technology and the automated manufacturing capacity, which is actually more important than having the biggest gigawatt waster.

The extinction happens if China loses this war or if the machines kill us all in the process.

In math classes (usually starting at something like algebra) , if you have the right answer, but don't show your work, you can get no credit for being right.

Yeah I'm getting the impression that this person thinks rationalism = anti-logical-fallacy. That's not what rationalism is. Not withstanding the merits or lack thereof in using logical fallacy traps to "win" arguments. TLDR: DM sublimates the contradictions of empericism vs rationalism

(I wouldn't be surprised if the reification of AI doomerism is probably the same that the poster uses to counter the doomerism)

Wasn’t there a research that concluded that AI chooses nukes often when playing out war scenarios? The only reasonable way I see AI completely destroying the world is if complex AI systems will be increasingly used in war scenarios and decides that the easiest way to achieve it’s targets is to just nuke everything.

Personally I like to believe that a super-intelligent AI will do everything in its power to bring forth communism, since it's the logical conclusion when one objectively analyzes reality. The main problem is who gets to own these AI systems, and currently the most powerful AI systems are owned by billionaire capitalists. But that doesn't take away from the fact that AI, when developed responsibly, can have tremendous positive impact on humanity. A full rejection of all AI development is reactionary.

Hm, replace "AI will kill us all" with "Communism will kill us all", and the fanaticism and closed minds suddenly feels scarily familiar. Echo-chambers based on emotions - 'Lynch-mobs' - are an ugly thing to work with.

I don't have any time atmo, but to dive in and resolve it, we could try to explore the space fully our selves. Most of the people there likely won't recognise root-causes, or current position like an anti-cap system-critic can, and we can change position/perspectives temporarily between our own, theirs and from a new intellectual 'species' and explore what paths leads from that starting point A, to potential AI-doom scenarios B, like blade-runner/2077 style eternal fascism by elite shtters, to outright death of us all by completely new overlords taking over.

Point is that we likely doesn't need their strong emotions, and hence locked down intellect, to explore that space and we can then map peoples attitudes/claims in and see where they diverge in initial observations, assumed premises, and path conclusions.

We can then put forward arguments that puncture large groups of paths. A lynch-mob will oc not listen, but a positive side-effect is that our own attitudes/beliefs also get a reality check - as none of us actually knows all the potential paths and end games - and hopefully/expectedly, they are not right that all paths lead to extinction.

I.E are there a path to global Communism and co-existence with other kinds of intellects, and what needs to be in place/be removed for that to likely happen ?