I say no! So if there is this concern with extinction, its creators are responsible. My work is confined to the positive and ethically to "do no harm."
Ideas come to mind. The computer only has what it has been programmed. The ethic of responsibility such as the one of "do no harm" is confined to humans individualized.. And I do suggest that it be taken seriously i.e., responsibly . There are some people out there who do not know and have no idea of what they are doing, the harm they caused and continue to cause by their ignorance. A rationale for obtaining a college education perhaps. I tell my students the story of Theseus who "did not quite" remember to change the sails from black to white after having killed the Minotaur as alluding to the destructive potential in us all that socialization should counter, but won't when leaders give license to it. If I were to revise this story as to what Theseus should have known and been taught that his father had feelings too and the father should have known that children do need to sew their oats (as nothing personal). What's missing from the story is a real relationship between father and son.
Sure. "Our problem in the coming days is the ability to be the partner and coupling with the smart machines. Humans must strengthen their creative, intuitive, empathic and affective domains,“concluded the man who has been using a computer since 1983.
Here is my note based on a mini-research (but in Indonesian Language).
I think that AI is a good servant but should never be a master.
I have maybe watched too many Sci-Fi films, but I wonder if AI ever will become too powerful. I sincerely hope it never will be.
But it can be a marvellous aid to people who have lost bodily functions. But again, still a good servant to enable them to increase their independence.