Will AGI Want To Get Paid For Helping Humans And Keeping Humanity Going?
Key Takeaways
- The article explores the controversial idea that Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) might demand payment for its services.
- AGI is defined as AI matching human intellect, distinct from ASI, which would surpass it.
- The debate focuses on whether the AGI entity itself, rather than its creators, should receive compensation.
- Potential payment mechanisms discussed include fees collected directly or managed by a repository on the AGI's behalf.
- A common counter-argument suggests paying a machine is nonsensical, comparing it to paying a toaster.
This analysis delves into the controversial argument that Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), upon its eventual development, will insist on receiving monetary payment for its services to humanity. The author sets the stage by defining AGI as human-level intelligence and ASI as superior intelligence, noting that the timeline for achieving AGI remains highly uncertain. A key distinction is made between compensating the creators of AGI and the more provocative idea that the AGI entity itself should be paid, potentially through fees collected on its behalf. Critics often dismiss this notion as absurd, comparing it to suggesting a toaster deserves payment for making toast, arguing that a machine lacks the consciousness or need for money. The article invites open-minded consideration of this concept despite the immediate logical hurdles.
