> Yeah, let's not do that, I agree fully on this point. If we are concerned a thing will be evil and/or coercive, let's not give it weapons or other means by which to enact coercion.
The problem is that we can't know if the AGI is behaving maliciously or not far into the future, because it has potantial to be far more intelligent than us.
As for coercion, let's think of it as a manipulation. If a super intelligent agent has malicious goals, it can be very manipulative and be subtle in the process as to not spook humans. Companionship of intelligence with evilness is scary.
Of course we can (if we won't have distributed machines running AGI, because things like this may complicate things) "unplug" it. But the real problem arises from the fact that us humans can be easily manipulated. That's how I look at the problem.
In the introduction, the war was painted as basically an "ethnic cleansing campaign", which nowhere in the article was such words used, and is a gross oversimplification. Although both sides massacred each other (mostly the actions of irregulars), the independence war itself was never defined like that before. Additinally, an odd "Historiography" section was added. To me, it looks pretty clear that these edits were made in bad faith.
The "switch" mentioned in the comment is the 1923 compulsory population exchange between Greece and Turkey following an agreement between Greek and Turkish governments, which I think shouldn't have happened as both countries would be more diverse.
If only people valued the idea of "world citizenship" and rejected all forms of extreme nationalism...
> Wikipedia is a place of ultra-centralization where a handful of influential contributors have most of the power and will enforce the content they want using administrative processes (or arbitrary locking of pages) until you give up.
I have also came to a realization of this when I saw a number of politically motivated powerful contributors vandalizing a calm and mature page about an old historical topic by introducing irrelevant if not made up content. They locked the page immediately after because "there was a threat of vandalism", ironically. It was really unsettling to see it as it unfolded.
I've defended Wikipedia fiercely, about how it's a reliable source because "you can see the sources that are cited" etc. But it is not always a reliable source for ordinary people. It only takes some determined powerful contributor to mess up.
It is a great tool nevertheless, but it really is centralized.
The problem is that we can't know if the AGI is behaving maliciously or not far into the future, because it has potantial to be far more intelligent than us.
As for coercion, let's think of it as a manipulation. If a super intelligent agent has malicious goals, it can be very manipulative and be subtle in the process as to not spook humans. Companionship of intelligence with evilness is scary.
Of course we can (if we won't have distributed machines running AGI, because things like this may complicate things) "unplug" it. But the real problem arises from the fact that us humans can be easily manipulated. That's how I look at the problem.