> Undoubtedly, a transition of this magnitude could be enormously disruptive. But there is another possibility worth considering: that the extraordinary speed of progress itself compresses the period of disruption.

> To me and to our team at Infinite Ascent, this future of expanding abundance driven by an explosion in intelligence is something we deeply believe in, and something toward which we have chosen to direct our resources.

> But our underlying belief is one of profound optimism: that greater intelligence can ultimately produce a world of greater abundance, greater knowledge, and greater possibility, while allowing us to build in a way that benefits both intelligent life and the natural world around us.

I typed out a much longer comment going over some of my extreme disagreements with this article, but it's all so pointless. I'm just yelling at the clouds.

I just hope when this doesn't work out as planned these people reflect for a minute on their contribution to suffering they have caused.

I guess I'll just remind people that thanks to technology we already live in a world with abundance of food. What we don't live in is a world in which people would rather save a hundred starving kids over taking their family to Disney Land for a week. And so people die in complete avoidable ways every day, and who even loses sleep over it? That is why this article is wrong. If you make people economically worthless in a matter of years, I assure you, that will not end well. And that certainly isn't the only risk of ASI.