[mannykannot]

That would be for you to demonstrate, but even if we accept it to be true for the sake of a discussion, it is not relevant, because there is no reason to believe a non-human intelligence would choose to accept those ethical percepts that humans would prefer.

[staunch]

Unless humanity's level of ethics derive from our level of intelligence. In which case, our only complain would be that we're too stupid to understand its superior ethics.

The same way a dog might not understand the ethics of a doctor injecting life-saving medicine into it. The doctor is acting super ethically but cannot explain it to the dog.

[mannykannot]

We are under no logical obligation to accept that the ethics of entities that can outsmart us are superior, even if your premise is correct - and as that premise itself is merely speculative at this point, it would be wise to be prudent.