Very very unlikely (if you ask me), generally a contender is unable to even see radically new technologies after they're up-and-coming. That they would design it, design it properly, and launch without fanfarre is extremely unlikely to me.
* CBs are monetizing enormously; and if they stop the stock market crashes; they are also promising inflation;
* the Libor conspiracy might bring down one TBTF in London
* Bankia and Santander are under stress and might fail
* There's a full-blown currency war going on with competitive devaluations
* People are placing billions of dollars betting that the Japanese bonds & yen will collapse
* there are reasons Germany is repatriating their gold
I could go on, but bitcoin is oblivious to all that; in some ways it is less risky than the int'l banking system.
Finally, just as an example, the Fed is printing $800,000 new usds per each new bitcoin created. I'm not saying that bitcoin is going to be that valuable, of course, but if you look at the numbers involved you might as well consider putting some savings completely out of an interconnected banking system that is the contrary of the internet: it needs all nodes to be up and running to survive.
You realize how much freedom people like you take from regular people? PayPal makes the Sopranos look kind and caring, as do he TBTF banks.
"Doesn't sound legit".... I hope you're caught into the other side of "inverted totalitarianism" and just maybe you might be able to see what the mirror has to show you.
For digital goods you use bitcoin, always and everywhere. please fix this as soon as your next release, God what are you thinking? The USSA has become a beacon of INVERTED TOTALITARIANISM. google that.
I've known Harry for a long time. Extremely intelligent. Amazing scientist. Hardcore pacifist. We are friends, we have been roommates, we have traveled together in the US, and in Greece. Good times.
He has taken a principled stance against AI, which I disagree with, but it's his decision. And I do respect it.
Every person that takes a principled stand will be called crazy.
This is sad, because if/when the time comes for YOU, dear reader, to take a principled stand on X, be sure they will call you crazy.
Anyways, I think his case isn't well put in the article. He provides a single scenario for a brutal use of AI. I think a better case can be put--scary stuff we are working on; AI is dangerous. I myself worry much more about Orwellianism and "We" and "Brazil" scenarios than the nuke stuff. But I don't think we should stop the work; I think the only route is to try to get more influence in the direction things may go.
I told Harry, back in the day when he wrote this, which is years ago (2006, probably), that I disagreed with his position, the nuke cat is out of the bag, we had a nice discussion about it, and that was that.
Is he crazy? Not by a longshot. I would leave my firstborn with him and travel around the world without a shred of worry.
So would my wife.
But wtf do I know; I'm just another crazy guy on the internet, right?
What should happen if you use iPhone tethering? Could it top into the vast people on that network? (I have absolutely no idea). If this is the case, the internet will have a panic attack in 2 days max.