In addition to being selfish to the point of self-detriment, most such people also have an overinflated ego. (Before the mods get their knickers in a twist, I am not referring to any person in particular.) They put themselves over their community, country, and the world, so much so that they themselves will lose out in the long run.
There may exist one in a billion people who may objectively carry the opinion, but even they won't be doing anyone justice if they come in the way of the progress of AI which will ultimately overtake them too.
> You speak as if the future of this tech is settled fact, but it isn't. All anyone has is speculation.
In retrospect, you don't seem to have any clear argument whatsoever, just handwaving, posturing, followed by denying rather than strengthing your own point. Selfishness remains the succinct explanation.
My point is simple: nobody can know with certainty what the future of the tech will look like or how it will end up being used. Everybody is speculating. That some speculate differently than others doesn't imply any sort of personality defect with them.
I'd take it further and assert that when a person must resort to personal attacks rather than debating the point (whatever that point may be), the implication is that the attacker's position weak.
> You have presented no real counterargument. You have not presented an alternate future.
Counterargument to what? A future that is an alternate to what? None of these things have anything to do with the point I'm making here.
You seem to be wanting to engage in a discussion about something other than what I brought up, and accuse me not engaging in that discussion. I confess, I am not. It's not relevant to my point.
That's your opinion, and there's nothing wrong with that.
However, there are a lot of people who have a very different opinion, and there's nothing wrong with that.