I would argue that corporate actors (a state, an army or a corporation) are not true superorganisms but are semi-autonomous, field-embedded systems that can exhibit super-organism properties, with their autonomy being conditional, relational and bounded by the institutional logics and resource structures of their respective organisational fields. As the history of humanity has shown multiple times, such semi-autonomous with super-organism properties have a finite lifespan and are incapable of evolving their own – or on their own – qualitatively new or distinct, form of intelligence.

The principal deficiency in our discourse surrounding AGI lies in the profoundly myopic lens through which we insist upon defining it – that of human cognition. Such anthropocentric conceit renders our conceptual framework not only narrow but perilously misleading. We have, at best, a rudimentary grasp of non-human intelligences – biological or otherwise. The cognitive architectures of dolphins, cephalopods, corvids, and eusocial insects remain only partially deciphered, their faculties alien yet tantalisingly proximate. If we falter even in parsing the intelligences that share our biosphere, then our posturing over extra-terrestrial or synthetic cognition becomes little more than speculative hubris.

Should we entertain the hypothesis that intelligence – in forms unshackled from terrestrial evolution – has emerged elsewhere in the cosmos, the most sober assertion we can offer is this: such intelligence would not be us. Any attempt to project shared moral axioms, epistemologies or even perceptual priors is little more than a comforting delusion. Indeed, hard core science fiction – that last refuge of disciplined imagination – has long explored the unnerving proposition of encountering a cognitive order so radically alien that mutual comprehension would be impossible, and moral compatibility laughable.

One must then ponder – if the only mirror we possess is a cracked one, what image of intelligence do we truly see reflected in the machine? A familiar ghost, or merely our ignorance, automated?

> I would argue that corporate actors (a state, an army or a corporation) are not true superorganisms but are semi-autonomous, field-embedded systems that can exhibit super-organism properties, with their autonomy being conditional, relational and bounded by the institutional logics and resource structures of their respective organisational fields.

Lotsa big words there.

Really, though, we're probably going to have AI-like things that run substantial parts of for-profit corporations. As soon as AI-like things are better at this than humans, capitalism will force them to be in charge. Companies that don't do this lose.

There's a school of thought, going back to Milton Friedman, that corporations have no responsibilities to society.[1] Their goal is to optimize for shareholder value. We can expect to see AI-like things which align with that value system.

And that's how AI will take over. Shareholder value!

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/1970/09/13/archives/a-friedman-doctr...

Costs will go down. But so will revenue, as fewer customers have an income because a different company also cut costs.

Record profits. Right up until the train goes off a cliff.

That assumes that consumers will just accept it. I would not do business with an AI company, just as I don’t listen to AI music, view AI pictures or video, or read AI writings. At least not knowingly.

People would absolutely buy AI farmed meat or vegetables if they were 10% cheaper. The number of people who pay a premium depending on production method is a small minority.

As long as you stay inside capitalism you unquestionably and unequivocally do business with an AI company.

I mean, I don't know of any companies that are purely digital, with an AI as the CEO. Maybe that's coming, but I would not intentionally buy anything from such a company, or work for such a company, or invest in such a company.

I guess it would be like being a vegan. It might be a pointless effort in the grand scheme of things, but at least I can say that I am not contributing.

So OpenAI isn’t an AI company then?