Posts
Comments
"how confident are you that all humans with similar power levels would land on "pet" (or "live free in protected wilderness") rather than "meat"?"
Well, I'm more confident billionaires have enough meat to care more about nature reserves than farms. Struggling people on the other hand, will not spare animals or plants if they are starving.
See how Maine have the problem of billionaires turnins small farming towns to bankurptcy by making giant nature reserves, to thepoint they needed to suspend it. If they cared only about meat and money, they wouldn't spare the forests. If they didn't care about others, they wouldn't sacrifice some of their desire for nature reserves to keep some farming to provide income for their little towns.
We humans value meat and confort, but beyond that we jump to the next Maslow hierarchy. This includes biodiversity. Includes sustaining thriving small towns. Indeed, if we could maintain our confort lifestyles without hurting the earth biosphere or other people's income, we would do so.
The question is if ASI will care about it as we do. They only care about 'meat' of computation power or they'll value nature, biodiversity and other people life as we do?