Smith argued that this was in aggregate to the benefit of society, including competition between selfish businesses. He argued that monopolies are ultimately damaging to society.
The entity that first achieves real general AI has the potential to achieve a decisive strategic advantage that will allow it to shape the world in its image, free of competition. Traditional economics might not really apply anymore - the values that are built into the constructed intelligence will be paramount.
It won’t just all work out in the wash if we end up creating a superintelligence with values that are not to the benefit of humanity at-large.
> The entity that first achieves real general AI has the potential to achieve a decisive strategic advantage that will allow it to shape the world in its image, free of competition.
The focus on "general AI" is so so so shortsighted. You don't need general AI. Really, you don't want it. It's far better to have tools that you can control and direct that are specialized in specific areas. Specialized AI tooling is a force multiplier that can be leveraged however you want, general AI is an employee that might disagree with your goals.
I'm not scared of a superintelligence, I'm scared of AI being O'Brien's boot stomping on the face of humanity forever, in service to the corporations that invent it first.
The entity that first achieves real general AI has the potential to achieve a decisive strategic advantage that will allow it to shape the world in its image, free of competition. Traditional economics might not really apply anymore - the values that are built into the constructed intelligence will be paramount.
It won’t just all work out in the wash if we end up creating a superintelligence with values that are not to the benefit of humanity at-large.