Superintelligence: The Idea That Eats Smart People (2016)
I can&#x27;t help but take a stab.<p>Argument from cats. Remembering that the cat represents humanity: $5 for a group of neurons which will make the cat sit at this point (which happens to be at the entrance into a cat carrier), then $5 for making the cat backpedal a little.<p>Emus. There are many tactics humans can&#x27;t use for various reasons (saturation nuclear bombardment, for example). It doesn&#x27;t say much about intelligence, but more about economics and ethic.<p>Slavic Pessimism. So we&#x27;ll get problems on nth try, when AI is sufficiently fine, but security measures are still a mess, because there was no chance yet to battle test them.<p>Complex Motivations. Maybe, but if not we are screwed.<p>Actual AI. Why not from actual general AI, like in humans? Or use wall clock time and not the amount of data. AlphaZero: zero to superhuman in tens of hours.<p>My Roommate. Argument from ignorance. If we don&#x27;t know how to build general AI now, then we surely will not be able to shape its motivations when we will know.<p>Brain Surgery. The idea that a brain surgery skill requires specifically designed circuitry and cannot be learned and therefore improved by improvements of general learning&#x2F;planning capacity is... curious, I guess.<p>Childhood. Maybe, or maybe it already has very good knowledge of the world from previous attempts that we did in Slavic Pessimism argument.<p>Gilligan&#x27;s Island. Well, if someone wants their AI to reinvent all the technology, or to build an AI and then not use it to design better technologies, they can do it. Why everyone will be doing it is not so clear.<p>*Added some &quot;the&quot;s.