So I looked up stuff about computers and the brain and AI and shit, and after reading most of a chapter about how AI researchers have reluctantly conceded that brains aren't much like digital computers (we['re] no crazy futurists here), I skip ahead and find out that Friendly AI is the likeliest AI scenario for our future (credited to none other than Eliezer Yudkowsky, too. Right there in print.)
On the zombie afterlife of and weird phony authority that comes to attach to endlessly debunked formulations and unfulfilled promises and opportunistic PR repackaging efforts by futurologists, I'm pretty much resigned at this point to the fact that here in hype-notized zero-culture anti-intellectual America at any rate persistent techno-boosters -- however rampagingly crass and idiotic they are -- really do almost always eventually manage to beat out their critics -- however relentlessly right these are. This is mostly because, even at their most disasterbatory, futurologists are saying enormously reassuring things, pretending to know things when we can't because there is always much more going on than we know about, and peddling funhouse mirror variations on "the future" in which present values and lifeways are grotesquely amplified and then hawked as "change" in ways that flatter elite-incumbents and as "transcendence" in ways that console the mob. Of course, the critics wouldn't for the life of them want to join in the vulgar techno-booster parade come what may, and since the facts are mostly on their side anyway it all comes out in the wash. So a bunch of frauds attract unwarranted attention and hence make things pointlessly harder for sensible people, that's the crappy American dream isn't it?