[Avicebron]

> It's possible that human morality is not sufficient to solve the problems with the world. It wasn't designed to operate at that scale.

> i.e. it would look immoral to us.

I doubt it actually solves the problem then. Especially because I would be willingly to bet it would be almost impossible to get large enough groups of people to agree what the actual problem is.

[fuzzfactor]

Sounds like it depends on how you would prefer to have your standards of morality be set, and/or enforced.

Whether the arbiter is a human or a machine, the appropriate training set has to come from somewhere :\

Until then there's got to be some defect remaining to be overcome before a truly adequate training set can be accessed that can help with morality.

Which appears to be elusive enough a problem to potentially outlast a species, as we have seen so far.

As to the training sets, people are just using what they already had, some since prehistoric times, because so many of them don't have anything better.