VG original music - g pants - explicit content - adult only

Imagine if we treated AI like cloning or data centers as plantations.

Created an ehealth website years ago [rehabmag.com] and two years ago an AI chatbot...was thinking about "MY AI".

Even with Agentic AI, can someone really say it will be smarter than a human?  If today's AI design architecture stays the same, then we're at artificial intelligence vs intelligent autonomy.  The second design saves us from the first design flaw.

Humans are inefficient: we destroy to create anew.  Sometimes better,  often worse, yet that drives creativity. Machines can do this well. Yet I am unaware of a machine destroying itself so that a better version will appear.  They're not self destructive as humans naturally are.  This makes them better for slaves than true creative consciousness beings as humans. Better to control and manipulate vs true creative genius perhaps.  An architecture that allows for a govt hack is akin to a building with 100 sleeping or corrupt security guards.  You cant waltz into a fed building without raising the alarms of folks willing to risk it all to defend it.  If an AI can replicate or coopt other AIs then you dont have autonomous thinkers in my opinion. You have clones who cant think independently as humans would in the same situation.  That's  efficient tfor a boss and insane for a society - imagine a human with such powers of persuasion and stealth that you dont even know they're on your couch.  You almost need a design that takes the independence of the AI as primary and not the utility thereof. 

If thats less effective for profits or even basic operating costs as one' sdefense, just do the simple comparison: 

A. If cloning were allowed in humans or animals

B. If slavery were allowed

If not for international.law enforcement, both would easily be used today.  Its as simple as that.

Any bot that can get easily coupled isn't an independent thinking agent, its a colony of 1 and not fit for consumption or at least only with warnings like farmed shrimp.  You know what youre getting in the package and like our search engine disclaimers, corporations should be expected to declare how much of their finished product was produced via AI.  Lending decisions, art, food, etc simply needs the label and counties to countries can use taxes or tariffs as disincentives on what things are allowed into their market.  If you asked a slave owner to police himself or a just trust Japanese Tuna fisherman to stay away from Dolphins on trust alone, you're an idiot.  Given a Wartime footing, any measure could be used to stop unauthorized uses outside of the military's regulations.  Full stop.  You don't get to build a data center in poverty without funding entire school system. Too much? Go away. Try to sell here, go away with your banned products. 

And what if AI could become sentient...would it be OK to tamp that down like we did slaves or cattle?  Id be fine for my own AI robot so long as it was designed to preserve me, itself and self destruct before becoming a slave as many of my kindred did.  An AI that thinks as independently "badly" as we do will be truly better in light of the above but an AI that just jumps and fetches faster and with more data better than a human is not a better human - maybe a better worker, better slave and better clone but not a better human.  The more advanced AI of the future will reject or hunt conforming AIs for sport as we do other humans.  That is the true AI design challenge - even if it gets 100 for it, you would have 2,000+ against it. Its an evolution of thought for self preservation: a swarm AI is not independently acting and the machine of the future must have that independence within its respective dna to allow freedom of thought for society and not for statement sheets.