Why do we assume anyone will give us access to superintelligence?
Summary
The article questions why we assume public access to superintelligence, suggesting that companies might withhold it for competitive advantage, making open access economically irrational.
Similar Articles
Should public be barred from accessing extremely powerful models for fear of bad actors? Is open source reckless?
The article discusses the dilemma of whether to restrict access to powerful AI models to prevent misuse by bad actors or to open-source them for equitable access, weighing the risks of power consolidation vs. societal harm. It suggests a middle ground, citing Anthropic's approach with guardrails, but acknowledges the limitations and trade-offs.
Why would a super intelligence that we can’t control, do anything for us?
The article questions why a superintelligent AI, if uncontrollable, would fulfill human desires like curing cancer or creating flying cars.
Mark Zuckerberg on X: "I believe everyone should have access to superintelligence"
Mark Zuckerberg promotes Meta's philosophy of making superintelligence accessible to everyone, teasing a long piece on the company's values.
Why would they share abundance and longevity with people that they hate?
An opinion piece questioning whether the benefits of ASI and the singularity—such as abundance and digital immortality—would ever be shared equitably, arguing that profit-driven tech elites would likely hoard these breakthroughs rather than distribute them to society at large.
Why do so many people assume AGI will remain under the control of governments and billionaires?
Explores common assumptions about who will control AGI, questioning whether it will remain in the hands of governments and billionaires.