[conceit]

In terms of hormonal emotions, which would be the most direct sense of value that we have is completely different. Love might feedback into aggression, but they are very different.

This is view is also very naive but it's the breakdown of the "good" and "bad" discussion. Nobody commits war crimes for their intrinsic value. This is akin to the saying, nobody likes to think they're the bad guys. Even, there are no bad values since the absence of value is the worst.

Naivety is not necessarily wrong, it's just the lack of detail which often leads to the wrong results.

[AndrewKemendo]

I'm not talking about hormonal emotions. I mean calculated decisions like "should we bomb lybia because they are creating nuclear weapons."

That is a question about an (arguably) existential threat, where force is used for (arguably) protective purposes.

The question is, if the AGI thought that a human was threatening it unprovoked (which would probably happen) would it just let itself get "killed" simply because it was a human doing it?

[conceit]

reminds me of this comic

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=4141

[AndrewKemendo]

Zach has a lot of great comics that accurately represent how a real AGI would probably work.

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=4122