AI aftermath scenarios
Some scholars believe that advances in artificial intelligence, or AI, will eventually lead to a semi-apocalyptic post-scarcity and post-work economy where intelligent machines can outperform humans in almost every, if not every, domain.[1] The questions of what such a world might look like, and whether specific scenarios constitute utopias or dystopias, are the subject of active debate.[2]
Scenarios[edit]
Libertarianism[edit]
Libertarian scenarios postulate that intelligent machines, uploaded humans, cyborgs, and unenhanced humans will coexist peacefully in a framework focused on respecting property rights. Because industrial productivity is no longer gated by scarce human labor, the value of land skyrockets compared to the price of goods; even remaining "Luddite" humans who owned or inherited land should be able to sell or lease a small piece of it to the more-productive robots in exchange for a perpetual annuity sufficient to easily indefinitely meet all of their basic financial needs.[8] Such people can live as long as they choose to, and are free to engage in almost any activity they can conceive of, for pleasure or for self-actualization, without financial concern. Advanced technologies enable entirely new modes of thought and experience, thus adding to the palette of possible feelings. People in the future may even experience never-ending "gradients of bliss".[19]
Alternatives to AI[edit]
Some scholars doubt that "game-changing" superintelligent machines will ever come to pass. Gordon Bell of Microsoft Research has stated "the population will destroy itself before the technological singularity". Gordon Moore, discoverer of the eponymous Moore's law, stated "I am a skeptic. I don't believe this kind of thing is likely to happen, at least for a long time. And I don't know why I feel that way." Evolutionary psychologist Steven Pinker stated, "The fact that you can visualize a future in your imagination is not evidence that it is likely or even possible."[32]
Bill Joy of Sun Microsystems, in his April 2000 essay Why the Future Doesn't Need Us, has advocated for global "voluntary relinquishment" of artificial general intelligence and other risky technologies.[33][34] Most experts believe relinquishment is extremely unlikely. AI skeptic Oren Etzioni has stated that researchers and scientists have no choice but to push forward with AI developments: "China says they want to be an AI leader, Putin has said the same thing. So the global race is on."[35]