Sue Halpern in the New York Review of Books (October 21, 2021, “The Human Costs of AI”) quotes from an essay written by the (not-human) natural language processor GPT-3. The essay was written “not long after [GPT-3] was released”. The third version of the Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT-3) was asked to compose a piece with the title “The Future of Humanity”. She writes that the result “was, essentially, a collection of words and phrases one might expect to see in such an essay. Strung together, though, they were vacuous.” That is, mindless, without intelligence. Here’s the last sentence of her example:

"We are on the brink of a technological revolution that has the potential to eradicate human suffering while simultaneously bringing an end to our existence as a species."

But what if we take that sentence as a proposal? Clearly, bringing an end to our existence as a species would indeed eradicate human suffering. From the point of view of an AI that might make some sense.

It might even be something that we would want it to do for (to) us.