It sounded logical that when we could create an AI that&#x27;s cleverer than ourselves, it would create a singularity, a more and more intelligent AI auto-created by itself.<p>It&#x27;s the basis of the popular warnings expressed by many clever people, but I&#x27;ve come to doubt this assertion.<p>1- When Stephen Hawking was born, his parent created a child cleverer than themselves, yet it did not produce a singularity. Hawking got more and more intelligent, yet it wasn&#x27;t exponential. And his offspring did not create a singularity either.<p>2- A &quot;better than us&quot; AI may never get exponentially better than us. Maybe it&#x27;s an NP problem: maybe the AI would &quot;never&quot; have the time to become more and more intelligent.<p>3- If we can create a very intelligent AI, I doubt it would exterminate humanity to save nature. Why? Because nature loves diversity, and we&#x27;re a part of this diversity. Also, this AI may have a sense of fate: even if our fate is to destroy the planet because we&#x27;re so dumb, maybe this AI will think it&#x27;s just our fate.<p>4- I guess humans are very afraid AI could do what humans do: kill people, destroy the planet, make war, try to dominate others, try to manipulate others and punish. These human traits have not much to do with intelligence.<p>5- If I find a way to transfer my brain into a computer, a very expensive and powerful one, there&#x27;s no guarantee it will evolve faster than me, or handle data faster than me. Actually, I guess the first &quot;better than us&quot; AI will most probably be very slow.<p>What if the AI singularity just creates better and better computers? Because this super-AI is actually a computer.
I've come to doubt the AI singularity apocalypse