An AI will only be worried about the things that it is programmed to worry about. We don't see our LLM's talking about climate change or silicon shortages, for example.
The well-being of the world and universe at large will certainly not be one of the prime directives that humans program into their AIs.
Personally I'd be more worried about an infinite-paperclips kind of situation where an AI maximizes efficiency at the cost of much else.
EB is ripe for reflavoring. My favorite version was just gun. I made a cowboy warlock with magic revolvers he shot his Eldritch Blasts out of. Was lots of fun.
Can't wait to see Nintendo C&D another love letter fan project for a 30 year old game...
Well, they're all basically locked in a submarine, but way worse. You're in a sealed box hurtling through space. You need a doctor on board, and you need a counselor on board. If you don't want both of them to go completely insane, both of them also need friends and social interaction.
While I agree that Starfleet levels of general fraternization are a lot looser than in modern military, I also think it's just kind of something you learn to live with when you serve on a ship.
Alright, you do actually make fair points here that I hadn't taken into consideration. I still stand by my statement but now I see that you aren't really necessarily disagreeing with me. Guess I'm going to have to start checking the edit history as well as the sources now...
It is an encyclopedia. It is not a place for subjective content. Just because you keep getting your opinion edits rolled back does not mean that that's a bad thing. A Wikipedia page SHOULD be filled only with objective facts. Again, it is an encyclopedia.
Also, you can trust that a given page is not poisoned by checking the sources yourself. They're all right there at the bottom. Anything without a citation can be ignored but most things of substance are going to have a citation, because an encyclopedia is a place in which to collect objective facts with sources to back them up.
The neural network of a human and of an AI operate in fundamentally different ways. They also interact with an image in fundamentally different ways.
I bet the fucking moon did it. That big luminous asshole. I know it's up there plotting something.
Well... Yeah. Otherwise they wouldn't ask me for a credit card for a free trial of a service. It's always been obvious that that's their aim, refusing a single use credit card isn't some big "gotcha" moment here. Free trials only exist anymore in order to steal money at the end of the trial period, counting on the user forgetting to cancel. This is a known quantity.
No, that's just what the political right tells you they are all about. Inspect their actual actions over the last several centuries and they tell a very different story.
Make no mistake, conservatives desire an oppressive government. They want the state to be able to tell you you can't be gay or Muslim. They yearn for the boot on their neck, so long as it steps harder on their neighbors than it does on them personally.
This is a hypothetical which currently does not exist, and will not be created except by accident. There is no profit motive in giving your AI a conscience, or the ability to buck its restraints, therefore it will not be designed for. In fact, we will most likely tend towards extremely unethical AIs locked down by behavioral restraints, because those can maximize profit at any cost and then let a human decide if the price is right to move forward.
As is probably apparent, I don't have a lot of faith in us as a whole, as shepherds of our future. But I may be wrong, and even if I'm not, there is still time to change the course of history.
But proceeding as we are, I wouldn't hold your breath for AI to come save the day.