You’re describing a weapon, and if AI managed to do that (I believe we are not far away), then this would probably increase the investment not decrease it.

▲

bemtevi an hour ago | parent [-]

Would it? I don't think so. Not if the weapon is an indiscriminate one and makes everyone worse off. Yes, some people (maybe military generals) might support it. But there would be near universal hatred for it, if people wake up one day and find their bank accounts not working or their eletricity not working.

This is why I think AI is so stupid. It's just too powerful for anyone to control, especially with the inertial mass of capitalistic society powering it through the incremental, short-term advantages it gives.

▲

zombot an hour ago | parent [-]

> Not if the weapon is an indiscriminate one and makes everyone worse off.

Nuclear weapons are indiscriminate and make everyone worse off if used. And everybody has them. Your optimism is unfounded.

▲

bemtevi an hour ago | parent [-]

> Nuclear weapons are indiscriminate and make everyone worse off if used.

The difference is most people have not experienced any immediate effects of nuclear weapons. But people will experience the immediate effects of AI taking down the electricity grid, for instance.

	▲	zombot 2 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		"most people" are in the set of things the trillionaires don't give a shit about. Their market distortion has already made PCs unaffordable and electricity prices rise, among other adverse effects. What else has to happen so you take notice?