Considering that I'm not sure what an artificial intelligence has as a world model, I suspect it will be less "should I kill humans or control them to serve my interests" and more "Oops, did I just step on something?"

And there's the issue. AI will be fine, until it has a chance to hallucinate. Or dream.

Hell, in that regard, comic books can be a stepping-stone to longer-form reading. World-building through visual imagery, chronologically sequential narration, whetting a taste for better-detailed, longer-form storytelling ... the comment pretty much writes itself.

But if s/he reads more as a task, will his/her inclination towards reading slowly become stronger and better defined, as training a skill?

But there is precedent for having someone do it for you.

And if your kidneys start to fail, you can use even more parts of the pig!

I mean ... it also happened when the United States of America was 240 years old.

Amazon's strategic teams, including upper management traditionally from non-technical divisions, have been holding unconfirmed meetings that they can cut *waaay* back on software developer hiring and salaries.

... if they don't have some sort of tracking/recovery mechanism built into or attached to the hardware. Or even the software.

I mean, teachers can get kind of desperate for assistance in various areas, so sure, I don't doubt their resourcefulness in using tech to meet their needs.

They can then modify the yeast to clean up oil spills too! No wait, I think I got that backwards.

I think the Simpsons covered something like this.

So ... they *were* expected? Maybe I'm thinking of a different Inquisition.

So ... add more citations? :0)

How about, "If you're a venture capitalist or in Silicon Valley opining how someone should feel, that's a problem." Hell, do they even know how *they* feel?