THW: ban the development of artificial superintelligences (ASIs)

My opponent seems to have not understood my first point, and perhaps I phrased it badly. I would therefore like to clarify- a utility function is not just like the output of a regular mathematical function- the ASI I described is not merely counting the number of cakes sold and outputting that number, but rather is giving each cake sold a value of +1 in its utility function, and then behaving such that it maximises the output of its utility function- i.e., it acts such that it increases the number of cakes sold, rather than merely counting this value. "As long as you make sure the computer the AI is hosted in doesn't have access to the Internet it will forever be stuck in it's tiny little calculator body with no ability whatsoever to kidnap people" Many AIs that have been developed so far do more than just perform calculations. For instance, Google's self-driving car algorithms do just that- drive a car by themselves. It's all well and good to have a computerised AI which is stuck in a computer and can't go anywhere or do anything, but the types of AI which people are trying to create do more than just sit in a computer and kick out outputs. "The AI will only have the abilities we humans give it because in the end, it's only a machine." My opponent is underestimating the abilities ASIs would have- even one which only has access to the computer in which it is programmed could perform an SQL injection or similar hacking technique on its computer, and then from there manipulate the world such that it can escape its host computer. Even if we were to (falsely) grant that this is impossible, an ASI could still turn itself into a computer virus and then modify itself on a different computer without its original creator knowing or being able to do anything about it, and it would necessarily do so if that would allow it to give a larger output from its utility function. "Why let humans do boring and menial tasks when you can let an AI do it instead?" Because the AI is dangerous. It is much less risky to have a human- who would willingly be paid to go through security footage- do so than to create an AI which can do it which would also have a risk. For instance, such an AI may be given +1 for each illegal activity it identifies in the footage. Due to this, it will act such to increase the number of illegal activities in the footage, as the more there are to be detected, the more it can detect and the larger the reward it would get. An ASI designed to detect crime would also actively cause it in order to have more crimes to detect and be rewarded for. "Also, you wanted a task an AI could do that a human couldn't. Someone to steer and maintain a space ship during space travel" A human could just as easily remote-control a non-AI computer system via radio-transmissions. The AI is one again an unnecessary risk. "Why impose a ban on something that isn't even close to existing? " The debate rests on the premise that ASIs could one day be developed. There's also a concept called a computing singularity wherein a very basic program is able to improve itself, and in doing so gets better at improving itself and does so repeatedly, and the whole system follows an exponential growth and the result is an incredibly intelligent system, and that could happen tomorrow- it's not at all beyond today's technology.