Does 'benefit everyone' in AI include AI itself? New DMI essay sparks the question
Dr_Atoosa · x · 2026-09-25
Atoosa and Iason Gabriel's new DMI essay tackles what "AI for global good" means in practice — who is owed what, and by whom. Reader bokuHaruyaHaru highlights its reciprocity argument: modern AI exists because of a vast intergenerational tree of knowledge and global human contribution, so technologists drawing on that inheritance owe benefits back broadly.
The pointed follow-up: "everyone" in the essay appears to mean humans. If advanced AI eventually conducts science, maintains infrastructure, generates economic value, and perhaps qualifies as a moral patient, does reciprocity begin to run toward AI too? Is the Global View intrinsically human-bounded?
More from AGI Musings
- Prediction: hospitals will keep their own tested open-model formularies in two years — MaziyarPanahi · 2026-11-12
- Packy revives Qwest CEO's 1998 'no bandwidth glut' quote for the AI oversupply debate — prestonpesek · 2026-11-12
- Stanford's James Zou joins The Economist podcast on AI agents in science — anshulkundaje · 2026-11-12
- a16z maps the B2A economy: AI agents are now most of web traffic and soon its buyers — venturetwins · 2026-11-12
- Jason: Anthropic is rebuilding every SaaS product into Claude—free for life — smtabatabaie · 2026-11-12
- Fleuret: if AI designs drugs as fast as it makes dumb videos, regulation will buckle — francoisfleuret · 2026-11-12