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?
Related event: DeepMind philosophers argue all humanity has a moral claim to AI's benefits(9 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Devs debate: Is AI shattering egos or inflating them? — jdjohnson · 2026-09-25
- 'Put the Fries in the Bag, Terence Tao': A Provocative Essay on Human Dignity in the AI Age — granawkins · 2026-09-25
- Agents can't infer your preferences from a few questions — users must teach the model — jamesbrandecon · 2026-09-25
- Framing AI doomerism as mere neuroticism gives up on predicting the future entirely — AndyMasley · 2026-09-25
- Andy Masley: Framing doomerism as mere neuroticism incapacitates AI debate — AndyMasley · 2026-09-25
- Putting God in the Machine: AI as the next tool for coordinating strangers — imrsn · 2026-09-25