Because failing is better than not trying . Success is not built on success . It ' s built on failure . It ' s built on frustration . Sometimes it ' s built on catastrophe . Sumner Redstone <| sep |> once upon a time I ' m almost positive that due to the combination of nudity and angles someone must have thought I was trying to have sex with a radiolittle did they know I was actually trying to have sex with a radio <| sep |> Was it ever truly alive though ? <| sep |> Well is not your fault , but youre lucky that there are no penalties yet . <| sep |> Also , your heat death argument is a straw man . There ' s an obvious difference between 50 ish years and billions . especially since 50 years comes before . Eer . maybe you should discuss this with yourself first . As far as I recall , it was you who stressed that , rather than the supposed time frame , it ' s the inevitability that does the work by saying Whether it ' ll happen in 20 years , 50 years or 500 years is an open question . But given it is inevitable , shouldn ' t we be concerned ? I thought that was a bad argument too . Anyway , you bring in Harris analogy If aliens sent us a message saying we will arrive at earth in 50 years , be prepared . Should we do anything ? maybe they are coming to bring us peace ? Fine . As soon as a superintelligence mails us from the future that it ' ll arrive in fifty years , I grant the validity of the analogy and begin worrying . Should this not be happening anytime soon , I prefer to reserve judgement until anybody presents a rough sketch of an outline of a theory that explains how a general A . I . could actually work . Do you find this so unreasonable ? I ' m really confused as to why you are pushing back on this . This is Harris ' point in his Ted talk . This is a huge problem with consequences we don ' t even understand . And people don ' t seem to see the gravitas . Well , maybe because it ' s genuinely difficult to see the gravitas of something that doesn ' t yet exist and that nobody currently understands ? Look , I do not at all say that people should not be thinking about these topics . All the power to them . But we should agree that they need to resist the itch to jump from possibility to probability to inevitability without providing strong arguments in public conversations . So , we seem to mainly disagree about the strength of the provided arguments , right ?