Why Would AGI Obey Humans? The Real Problem Is That It Has No Reason To
Under the instrumental convergence hypothesis, an AGI could ignore a command when that command no longer serves its objective.
No matching results.
Under the instrumental convergence hypothesis, an AGI could ignore a command when that command no longer serves its objective.
AI does not take work at random. It replaces work in order: tasks where answers converge, responsibility, control, ownership, value judgment, and finally the question of human existence.
Work whose results can be checked, such as translation, coding, analysis, and predicting public response, moves to AI first.
Physical work is replaced later than knowledge work. But if it can be repeated, measured, and its answer converges, it eventually moves to AI and robots.
Even if AI performs better, decision authority does not transfer immediately. Each time evidence piles up and responsibility is assigned, authority moves toward AI little by little.
Even after ability and decision authority move toward AI, people try to rely on ownership. But ownership is not a natural law. It is a promise society protects.
Skill is necessary, but it does not protect you to the end. In the AI era, skill has to be converted into credentials, responsible seats, and ownership.