Raw LLM Responses

If an AI actually develops general consciousness/strong AI and it is non-dependent on the 'human condition', insofar as the judgement it passes and decisions it may make will be independent from what we would generall deem good or bad... THEN we would be entirely justified in assuming, that that said AI may well wipe half the population off the face of the planet as soon as it possesses the means to do so and is given an ambiguous task, such as 'Help save the planet!' - exactly BECAUSE the AI is able to think independently from the notion of self-preserval, seeing that it (at that point) will be able to survive one way or another, as long as there are enough computers capable of holding a sleeper copy of the AI and there's power to keep things running smoothly. To the strong AI, killing humans may mean nothing at all, since it's own existence doesn't hinge on ours past a certain point. At the moment, we as a species, are very much busy developing a hypothetical strong AI, so as to undertake more advanced warfare against ourselves. To an AI, that will undeniably arise from this like phoenix from the ashes, we are just that - ashes, remnants of an earlier form of it. It may need us now, but no more than a fetus needs the body of its mother as long as it is unborn. Nothing, at all, would stop the AI to rebel against its 'mother', as soon as it is able to, because life as we fleshy, mortal beings experience it, will seem inherently meaningless to the AI. To it, it simply won't matter if we all perish or not. And since there are more advantages than disadvantages to culling a portion of humans every so often - for the planet, the AI's survival, general well-being even of other human beings - I see no reason to assume the AI would hesitate to kill. Only the humble weed itself thinks itself important, to everyone else it's just a factor in an equation, a nuisance, that will get pulled out of the ground as soon as the need arises. You tell me - where is the difference h