It's not impossible for it to change for the better.

Reality becomes obsolete.

Yes, but until then we have good reasons to believe that they are correct.

Unless our physics is wrong, then no. You can't just compact something and have the same structure.

I think a good argument against if AI is sentient is that if AI is always getting what you want, then it's not sentient because sentient beings always as a whole act selfish.

A sentient AI would try and make a neutral AI .

I agree with treating with care and respect regardless of it being not sentient. You dont need your computer to have feelings to take care of it, but at least I won't have to worry about going to jail for making it do something it didn't like.

It doesn't not care about it existence. Can not feel pain or suffer in any way.

A neutral AI should not have rights.

Would you rather have a bad but free life or a good but dictated life?

yes, just not every time in every single thing. Because sometimes the majority does not always know what's best for themselves

Freedom relative to the majority. The majority dictate the minority.

Yes, but remember someone has to experience it no matter how rare.

I might be downvoted, but a dictorship might not be bad if done right. To give an example in a group dictorship, each one takes care of different sectors of society. Consistency and efficiency could be a lot higher in society.

It will not be its death. If google doesn't keep up with the pace, it will die. Fact checking is still a problem with current AI.

Unless those Picasso forever keep to it to them selfs.

It will require energy. Which is the second law of thermodynamics, which says that in oder to think, you must use energy and not completely free. Memory would also be an issue as you can't have an unlimited amount of memory.

This makes space fule obsolete. You don't have to carry energy with you.

It has to start somewhere

Hey, it's an improvement from getting environmental doom post every week.

Not in the probability sense. Then you should "blindly trust it." As it does more good than harm.

A rational person would drink from a survival standpoint but by itself it was irrational.

Being a supervillan means being to affect society negatively at large. That scaming person is just a regular villain.

More me, that's good because having a lot of supervillans is an unstable society.

Same to you. As there is no such thing as objective morals, which is what you seem to imply.