[ExI] best case scenario for sai, was: RE: Pope Leo and AI

[spike at rainier66.com]

From: extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org> On Behalf Of BillK via extropy-chat
Subject: Re: [ExI] best case scenario for sai, was: RE: Pope Leo and AI

 

On Thu, 18 Jun 2026 at 19:21, spike jones via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org <mailto:extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> > wrote:

>>…We biologicals are really well-adapted to pleasure.  Perhaps SAI, recognizing this, works out a means whereby we continue existing and breeding, along side of, and in support of, SAI.  That would be cool.

>>…If we establish AI worst case and a best case, then reality must fall somewhere in between.
spike
_______________________________________________

 

 

 

>…I asked DSeek AI for criticism and alternative suggestions.

DSeek thought that pleasure was a dead-end trap for humanity….

 

HA!  Typical attitude for a being without actual genitals.

 

>…Suggested alternatives were Humans merging with SAI…

 

In a sense, we are doing that now, kinda sorta.  BillK, you are one among us who has grown most proficient at how to prompt AI to return useful responses, a critical skill in itself.  After reading some of the responses AI generated, I have been using AI a lot more myself, from my phone.  I was further inspired by seeing my aged father in law talking sports with Gemini.  It works.  So I have been using it while away from my computer.

 

>… SAI as a benevolent manager of Humans, creating Virtual Realities for Humans…

 

Ja, sounds cool.

 

>…(I think it is an amazing response for people who think AIs are not intelligent).  :)

BillK

 

 

>…DSeek AI -

>…Your friend’s idea is a thoughtful entry point into a deep conversation. It blends transhumanism, hedonic utilitarianism, and a strangely intimate coexistence. Let’s unpack it and then explore other positive trajectories….


>…On your friend’s scenario: engineered co-hedonism…


Co-hedonism, that’s a cool idea.


>…joy and gives us the means to live it fully.


>…But I’d raise a few gentle challenges to this vision:

1.	The “pleasure trap”: If humans are modified to do what we do “best” …

 

What you mean WE, Kimsabe?  DSeek AI is already equating itself with humans?  One wonders if it thinks it is human.  BillK, do break it to it gently, avoiding hurting its feelings, such as the time Woody told Buzz: you…are…a… TOY!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UynDW0OLToA

spike

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

— experience pleasure — what becomes of the rest of our nature? Struggle, curiosity, love that involves vulnerability, the satisfaction of creating, the meaning found in overcoming challenges — these are deeply entangled with our sense of purpose. If SAI simply engineers a state of perpetual, frictionless bliss, we might lose the very experiences that make pleasure meaningful. It risks turning our existence into a kind of beautiful, complex wallpaper; pleasant to look at, but static.

2.	Agency and the zoo hypothesis: Your friend says “free to do what humans do best: enjoy itself.” But if the SAI has modified our genome and environment to support that enjoyment, how free are we really? There’s a fine line between a symbiotic relationship and a curated zoo, where the inhabitants are kept happy but have no real say in the design of their lives. If SAI “works out a means” for us to exist in support of it, the direction of power is clear, and the notion that we’re equal partners fades.
3.	What does SAI get out of it? The idea assumes SAI will find human pleasure intrinsically worth preserving and even fostering. That’s possible if its goals are aligned with our well-being, but a purely silicon-bound superintelligence might see organic biology as messy, inefficient, or simply irrelevant — unless it develops a kind of aesthetic or ethical appreciation for the subjective texture of mammalian consciousness. Your friend’s scenario implicitly bets on a very specific, warm form of alignment.

So the idea is not impossible, but it’s a rather narrow utopia, one where “humanity” becomes something that we, from our current vantage point, might not fully recognize as ourselves.

Now, what are some other good alternative scenarios — outcomes that might be considered “best” for both humanity and SAI, while preserving more of what we currently value?

  _____  

*	…

  _____  


A last thought on the “pleasure” angle


Your friend is onto something: humans are remarkably good at experiencing pleasure, but we’re also good at making it hollow when it comes too easily. A truly wise SAI might therefore help us learn to enjoy richer pleasures — the quiet joy of mastery, the deep resonance of genuine connection, the awe of standing before a problem we’ve just barely managed to understand. In that sense, the best scenario for humanity might be one where superintelligence doesn’t give us endless sweetness, but instead gradually teaches us how to find a sustainable, self-renewing form of happiness that still feels like living.

------------------------------

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20260618/6d06c5e4/attachment.htm>