This comment for Sam Harris applies here as well:<br> <br>I've listened to (very) many of your talks and debates on A.I. and I still have not heard you breach the main problem. Here's a bit of my Open Letter to you," which I will soon publish on <a href=""http://blog.banditobooks.com/"">blog.banditobooks.com</a>:<br><br>Who controls the developing Super AI was for me the most important question", and it went completely unanswered in all the papers and podcasts and videos (including yours, Mr. Harris, your TED talks, essays, blog posts and so forth) I took in. I even plugged this question in as a search term and came up empty, notwithstanding that one Youtube video was titled ‘THE GREAT DEBATE: Artificial Intelligence: Who Is In Control?’<br>That the ‘debate’ was moderated by your buddy (and another gatekeeper) Lawrence Krauss should have told me what was to come, which was this: Not a word about ‘who controls AI’ was spoken in an hour and a half, notwithstanding Krauss’s opening words to his high-powered panel: ‘The great debate on Artificial Intelligence… who is in control… is a question many of you have been asking…’<br>Not a word. (One means of misdirection is to brazenly title your video/paper/whatever as a question that is never answered, or even dealt with; a version of Hitler’s Big Lie philosophy.) But perhaps I should define my terms before accusations are made. ‘Control’ means, more than anything, ‘Whose money (plus other assets) is behind the R&amp;D?’<br>Would you agree that this is an important question? Yes? I’ll assume you agree here," for to not agree would certainly sound… odd.<br>Before I go further I will tell you who is in control of AI development and how I deduced this. Go here for a quick glimpse of part of the team that controls AI. (it’s a couple minutes.)<br><a href=""https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lDx4Arjr6k&amp;t=5s"">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lDx4Arjr6k&amp;t=5s</a><br>James Clapper has held various posts with the Intelligence Community", but at the time of his congressional testimony he was Director of National Intelligence, meaning he oversaw all the various agencies that collect data on U.S. citizens and then make use of that data; I believe the number of spy agencies is 16 but this doesn’t count groups/organizations that are not formally admitted to. In the above clip, Clapper is of course lying, under oath. Perjury. A felony. The same category of crime as B&amp;E, dealing heroin by the kilo, assault, manslaughter, murder…<br><br>Nothing happened to him. He wasn’t arrested; no repercussions at all. Not even a slap on the wrist, whatever that might mean to a spook of his magnitude. Just one of the agencies Clapper oversaw was the good old NSA, the group Snowden (and many others before and since him) outed as collectors/analyzers of every bit of data you and I put out on the Net, with no warrant, which is not only a(nother) felony but a breakage of the Supreme Law of the Land (the 4th Amendment of the U.S Constitution).<br><br>You want to know why nothing happened to Clapper, given his felonious testimony? It’s really simple: Everyone who could have done something to Clapper is scared shitless of him. Why? Because of the data he controls (and can falsify if he needs to). Anyone who doesn’t understand this is a fool.<br><br>Do you agree that this was almost certainly the reason he walked on this crime? Yes. No? Okay, if No, please give an alternative.<br><br>But my point is this: In the hundred or so hours of AI ‘debates’ and ‘symposia’ and so forth that I sat through, why is it that not one person mentioned anything about the Intelligence Community being in control of the development of Artificial Intelligence? But we’re talking about you here, aren’t we?<br>Why is it, Mr. Harris, that you have never mentioned the main reason we have to fear AI: Its abuse by those who control the data (and the money)?,(reply>), Maybe no one wants to answer you because you’re being stupidly aggressive?,(reply>), Interesting. I've also been always worried about the technological power that the <b>worst</b> people always eventually get to use.