> OBSERVATION: There are zero examples of any intelligent species which is vastly more capable than another species, yet surrenders decision-making control over its own future to the less-capable species.

Does the set of intelligent species only have one member? I cannot treat this observation as a general rule if there is literally one example of an intelligent species to theorize about.

▲

nl an hour ago | parent | next [-]

My problem with this is that yes, looking at the species level from our sample of ~1 the most intelligent species wins out (although there seems to be a lot of debate as to if Neanderthals were more or less intelligent than humans).

But within the sample of the human species it is more common for less intelligent people to control more intelligent people.

This happens within political systems (political leaders are usually above average intelligence, but hardly the most intelligent) and within companies and other economic systems.

I don't see this fairly obvious point discussed, and not really sure what it shows.

▲

shikwasa 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think the quoted part is saying that given n species and the n * (n - 1) binary combinations possible, there are no examples of the said observation. It doesn't suggest "the set of intelligent species only [has] one member".

	▲	jay_kyburz an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah but there is only one species that ponders its future. I stopped reading at this point because I reject this initial assertion, and I assumed everything that follows is based on it. There is nothing to suggest that an AGI will care about its future or who controls it. (whatever that means). that just more anthropomorphism. We care a lot about our future so an ai pretending to be like us will also pretend to care. But we have a lot of biology driving us. Our emotions (Fear, Hate, Love, Pride etc) are baked into us in a way just wont be the same for ai.