You may be interested in http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/05/22/ai-researchers-on-ai-risk/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/05/22/ai-researchers-on-ai-ri..., or mor

You may be interested in http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/05/22/ai-researchers-on-ai-risk/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/05/22/ai-researchers-on-ai-ri..., or more directly addressing your claim, http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/06/08/ssc-journal-club-ai-timelines/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/06/08/ssc-journal-club-ai-tim...: > 50% of experts think there’s at least a ten percent chance of above-human-level AI coming within the next ten years. (ten years!? sheesh) > And 40% of experts think that there’s a better-than-even chance that, once we get above-human level AI, it will “explode” to suddenly become vastly more intelligent than humans. > And 70% of experts think that Stuart Russell makes a pretty good point when he says that without a lot of research into AI goal alignment, AIs will probably have their goals so misaligned with humans that they could become dangerous and hostile. > ... 5% think this is “among the most important problems in the field”. Only a tenth – 1.4% – think it’s “much more valuable” than other things they could be working on. Not totally clear which of those Zuckerburg wouldn't agree with, but this isn't exactly a fringe concern anymore, even if most people think it's not worth thinking about yet.