I don’t see how not knowing the future plays into this. You would be paralyzed. Never able to do anything. It’s a sci-fi nightmare
Most people won’t even think about it if a person is drowning the natural thing to do is to save them no other thought will enter the mind and if the person chooses to kill someone in the future it does not put the responsibility on the person that saved their lives.You would have to wonder about a person that would think that. Watching a person drown and wonder if they save the person they might do an evil act so I better not save him. It would be a rare human being but they do exist and it could happen.
You need to have a scenario where the person has plenty of time to think about their choice this one does not work.
I’m stealing that and sharing it on FB. 
I really like it. Thanks.
Exactly. But it’s not some dystopian nightmare, it happens every day. We each act out of compassion (you and me at least ) or out of hate, or whatever, but bottom line, it’s a crap shoot. And that’s what’s disturbing to me, at least after having watched Travellers which put the notion into my mind at least.
So that nice thing you posted sounds all high and mighty and makes us feel squishy good inside, except that it’s nothing but words unless there’s something more than can show us that it is in fact true, the real way to go. Someone could post something very similar, but opposite, making readers of it feel all good about themselves doing what you and I would call evil. What makes one of those ways of acting the right or wrong one?
Slight aside. Travelers, to me, was the cosmic question of should we care about the future. We should, but at what sacrifice?
Also, the AI, if a super computer could give us the “best” outcome, should we listen? Does it really know what’s best?
A small example of the depth of analysis the new AI are capable of is demonstrated in the answer Leta gave when it was asked; “does a falling tree makes a sound if there is no one listening”.
Her initial answer was “no”, and that is already advanced understanding.
But when then further pressed to define what does happen, Leta answered; “it’s a thought”. The astounding truth is that from a universal perspective a wave function may be defined as a “thought”.
At least Roger Penrose (Nobel laureate) seems to subscribe to that abstraction.