Minsky was attempting to get the question asker to consider a broader perspective on the question.  Whether we build intelligent robots, or become them--through cybernetics, or even mind-uploading--in either case, he was making the point we should think of them as our children and successors.  To ask whether we should be concerned about such children "inheriting the Earth" is, to Minsky, as silly as our  ancestors fretting over their own children inherting the earth, whether future humans (us!) would inhert their world or not--regardless of whether those ancestors be ancient people, our primate progentiors, the earliest microorganisms, or even simply our parents and grandparents.  It is natural for people to want their progeny to proliferate, learn and grow, and inherit all that is left to them.  They do not put expectations on their progency to remain unchanged or be exactly the same as they were, especially those progeny off in the far far distant future.  Minsky is a forward-thinker, and a research roboticist for most of his lifeltime.  He was aware, in answering, that robotics are likely to be an important part of the lives of future humans, and very possible that many (if not all) future humans would begin to choose to inhabit robot bodies (perhaps partially at first, but eventually wholly) as the technology to do so becomes available.  And even if we build human-level intelligent robots from scratch, we will still have to--by the very nature of their human level minds-- teach them to live in this world, just exactly the same as we teach our biological children, and just the same as a child we adopt is no less our child.  By bringing Evolution into it, Minksy reminds us the process of change is not discrete, but continous, and it has gone on for a billion years, each generation inheriting the Earth from the last.  

Minky trained as students many of todays top robotics and artificial intellignce researchers, so his sentiment is certainly not uncommon.  However, artificial intelligence is a diverse field of many specialties and opinions. Furthermore, the Minksy quote you reference is regarding the far future.  Many atificial intelligence ethicists, as well as society at large, are more focused and concerned about the immediate and near future risks of poorly regulated and poorly understood AI.  Minsky's answer to the question is a good touchstone for inspiration and openmindedness, yet should be contrasted with the more balanced approach of his other works in their entirety.  It is not likely he wished to encourage anyone to let their guard down and pursue AI topics with reckless abandon, but rather to give them the perspective to not overreact to every prospect of intelligent machines by indulging in oversimplified delusions of Hollywood-esque clunky killbots mindlessly bent on world domination.
spam fails_task lang_mismatch pii not_appropriate hate_speech sexual_content quality toxicity humor helpfulness creativity violence