The problem is that an AI built to maximize paperclips might conclude that converting the planet to paperclips is an acceptable cost of maximizing paperclip production. It might understand why humans think it's bad to convert the planet, but disagree. It would need to be explicitly programmed to prioritize human life over paperclips.
otherwise we would just switch it off
If it were super-intelligent, it could probably trick us into leaving it turned on.
What, am I meeting the Pope or something?
A paperclip maximizer driven by self-preservation? What could possiblie go wrong?
Who grades the test? Who judges the competition?
I could write a comment on this if you want.
The problem is that you're using Windows 95.
Are there examples of censorship or prior restraint you'd like to highlight?
What, never?
I'm assuming the answer was wrong, but as a non-musician I don't see it.
"I have too much self respect and dignity, love my family way too much, and do not want my sweet district to have to endure a hurtful and hateful primary against me by the President we all fought for, only to fight and win my election while Republicans will likely lose the midterms," she wrote in a statement.
She could just not run for re-election if that's what she's actually worried about. Resigning early doesn't make sense.
The economic bubble being created between the AI and hardware companies is going to pop and take out huge swathes of the broader economy, a la mortgages in 2008.