Re: Google’s Artificial Intelligence Getting ‘Greedy,’ ‘Aggressive’

[grarpamp]

>         "Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us"
>         https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2

The closing from above...
"Whether we are to succeed or fail,
to survive or fall victim to these technologies,
is not yet decided"

True.
Having claimed and settled all the unexplored land
mass since a couple hundred years we can't
just run and migrate away from conflict.
Though we not yet managed to nuke ourselves in conflict
since then, probably because, well, MAD is mad.
How many years since last "all in" wars frequency is safe to say
we learned to at least not launch complete death at each other...
100, 250, 500?
If we make it to enlightened free global living, AI bot tech,
sustainability, solar, etc and it works, well there's that,
probably for a good long while.

However it is absolutely certain that Earth itself
will fail, taking everything down with it...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_catastrophic_risk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_of_Earth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth

So there are really only two choices...
1) Undertake everything we do by its contribution
toward getting us off the rock.
2) Call our own bet, nuke ourselves today, and give the
next blob that evolves up out of the oceans a good run at it.

Both meanwhile praying it isn't some space rocks
or aliens that do the job for good.

If you ever get beyond safe stellar distance (maybe),
you've got a universe of time and space to deal with.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_fate_of_the_universe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe

Transcending any of its forecast ends doesn't
look too easy at the moment. But you've probably
bought yourself a lot more time to think on it.

Who's giving odds on any of this, what are they,
and why?