> That's pretty damn optimistic, considering Yudkowsky estimates a 90% chance of extinction if we continue on our current course.

Even without AI, we're probably a greater than 90% chance of extinction within the next 100 years. Climate change is an existential threat to humanity, add in the wildcard of a nuclear war and I see no reason to be optimistic about a future without AI.

> I don't see why narrow AI couldn't be trained to solve specific issues.

Because humans are leading this planet to destruction for profit, and corporations wield too much power for governments to actually do anything about it. Narrow AI in the current state of the world would just be used as a tool for more and more destruction. I'm of the mindset that we need to be governed by a higher intelligence in order to address the threats facing Earth.