We didn't get a say in whether we should bet our entire economy on building out infrastructure for half a dozen guys to get rich from. No say in the way they are backdooring around the hamstrung EPA to install greenhouse gas machines to power these things. I think the pushback makes sense.

It's a pity because as computer scientists this should have been such a fun technological moment for us. What a cool thing to experiment and explore new open doors with. But instead it was immediately the driver of mass job loss, societal upheaval, and a double digit percent chance of ending humanity, espoused by the AI lords themselves.

> Why are they trying to build something to replace humanity?

The list of possible reasons is pretty short and mostly not really good for most of us, as far as I see it

Why do you want to block people who are open to the idea of becoming transhuman/hybrids? Let it play out and see whose society turns out better.

Do that without dragging the rest of us into it then. I will continue to vote to block and advocate against such a thing on a societal level. It should not be thrust upon humanity without our consent.

Why the fuck should your fucking opinion matter to what I or someone else does in their private property? Why don't you subject your own private property to a vote for everything? You are evil and want to destroy communities because you didn't ask the community before changing a light in your room.

> Also, I don't want super intelligence.

I do. Quite a lot of people do. And that is because we believe it will lead to a better life for most humans.

I don't think you're anywhere close to a voting majority. Rather quite a small minority of the human population would want such a thing is my guess. It may seem otherwise in your bubble though.

Why would you believe that?