While tech giants across the world work on materializing the idea of having a generative artificial intelligence (AI) to aid humans in their daily lives, the risk of the nascent technology going rogue remains imminent. Considering this possibility, Tesla and Twitter chief Elon Musk reminded the people of AI's potential to destroy civilization. On March 15, Musk's plan of creating a new AI startup surfaced after the entrepreneur was reportedly assembling a team of AI researchers and engineers. However, Musk continues to highlight the destructive potential of AI -- just like any other technology -- if it goes into the wrong hands or is being developed with ill intentions. According to Musk, AI can be dangerous. In a FOX interview, he said that AI can be more dangerous than mismanaged aircraft design or production maintenance, for example.

While tech giants across the world work on materializing the idea of having a generative artificial intelligence (AI) to aid humans in their daily lives, the risk of the nascent technology going rogue remains imminent. Considering this possibility, Tesla and Twitter chief Elon Musk reminded the people of AI's potential to destroy civilization. On March 15, Musk's plan of creating a new AI startup surfaced after the entrepreneur was reportedly assembling a team of AI researchers and engineers. However, Musk continues to highlight the destructive potential of AI -- just like any other technology -- if it goes into the wrong hands or is being developed with ill intentions. According to Musk, AI can be dangerous. In a FOX interview, he said that AI can be more dangerous than mismanaged aircraft design or production maintenance, for example.

Some theorists, like Bostrom, argue that we must nonetheless plan for very low-probability but high-consequence events as though they were inevitable. The consequences, they say, are so profound that our estimates of their likelihood aren't important. This is a silly argument: it can be used to justify just about anything. It is a modern-day version of the argument by the 17th-century philosopher Blaise Pascal that it is worth acting as if a Christian God exists because otherwise you are at risk of an everlasting hell. He used the infinite cost of an error to argue that a particular course of action is "rational" even if it is based on a highly improbable premise.