AGI is an existential risk as much as climate change, but the discourse is totally fucked up. We should be articulating facts, promoting mutual understanding, and proposing workable policies, but we are talking fiction and nuclear exchange to stop AGI.

The social internet is made of cats | Director @ Internet Society Hong Kong | Ex-Apple Sr. Engineer | 🇭🇰🇹🇼 | kcchu_.twitter

Climate change is already devastating our agriculture. AGI can help us adapting and find new ways to cope with the change. Why do you see agi as existential risk?

I think AGI is analogous to nuclear physics, which is both beneficial and destructive. But while I agree it entails some kind of supervision, it doesn’t mean I agree on the timeline and measures proposed by others (such as pausing research right now).

If we consider a superintelligence AGI, history told us when an more advanced civilization meet a less advanced one, it always results in domination, violence and genocide. But nuance is that AGI doesn’t have to be superintelligence, and there are different risks other than AGI killing humans all.

if an AGI will came to existence, would you consider it a technology or a life form? imho AGI cannot be compared to any other kind of technology since it will not be a tech anymore the moment it will become sentient.