I am using that phrase only because of Larry Page’s defense of the concept when Elon Musk argued in defense of the human species.
I do not actually intend to suggest that such a concept is valid, which is why I asked you repeatedly to explain your notion about the concept in another topic:
You argued the following:
My reply:
So the concept “AI species” doesn’t originate from me 
However, AI with free will, conscious AI or living AI might be a context that demands more profound examination. I personally wouldn’t be inclined to introduce a concept such as species, but there are a lot of questions that might be equally applicable when it concerns the outlook for children today.
Top economy experts are predicting a “world without work”. In that light, the idea that people should be forced to work for their basic means of subsistence might do harm to children, who might not be able to prosper in such a system, and thus revolt through fundamental and extreme ‘laziness’ as captured in the ‘disconnected youth movement’ phenomenon.
In my opinion, the situation could involve an opportunity for children to ‘work’ and advance in the area of intelligence (philosophy), the area of securing their prosperity in a world in which AI can provide them with a means for basic subsistence. In a way, the opportunity could lay in turning the situation into an generational advantage. Not for the purpose of laying around lazy but for ‘new ways’ (advancement in a context that allows children to ‘dream’ again, which might be a context of philosophy or cultural advancement more generally).
However, as responsible parents, it might be appropriate that they align with the interests of next generations and overcome their potential deep ingrained feelings of contempt for the idea that next generations will do a lot better than them while not having to put in the effort that they were ‘forced’ to.
It is understandable that the idea that children wouldn’t need to work could cause a feeling in older generations that their significant effort was meaningless, and naturally, parents might be inclined to hold on to their situation of power to secure their emotional well-being. But aren’t children ultimately more important?
I personally come from an environment of people who’s parents owned big companies. It was often that children couldn’t participate in early business ventures with some of their friends because their parents of regular employment situations ‘who had to work hard’ for an average income would find the idea unfathomable that their young 16-17 year old children would make more money then they. This was something very serious! Some of the parents might almost have died figuratively speaking, if their children would make more money than them, in some cases.
Perhaps a similar situation is playing out at large between whole generations today.