I'm extremely concerned about the existential threat that AI poses, but i'm not sure how much of it is realistic and how much of it is me just being paranoid (i've got schizophrenia but i'm being treated).
I'm mostly worried about AI making all human labour obsolete, thereby rendering most people basically useless, unable to even do fulfiling creative hobbies because even that can be done better by machines.
The second scenario is basically a skynet/matrix level control problem. How realistic is that for an AI to go rogue?
>inb4 paranoid schizo
Just because i've got some issues, doesn't mean my concerns are unfounded
>AI making all human labour obsolete, thereby rendering most people basically useless
define 'useless'
do you need to prove your worth?
are birds useless? are dolphins useless?
labour is a made up concept
no one needs to do more than raising food for themselves, which takes 100 days a year max
>AI making all human labour obsolete, thereby rendering most people basically useless, unable to even do fulfiling creative hobbies because even that can be done better by machines.
Very real
>a skynet/matrix level control problem
Very fictional
>billions of people are just gonna start raising food for themselves
Very delusional
>Very delusional
Yeah, it's not like humans used agriculture to survive for tens of thousands of years or anything.
>How can I do a thing if ai does it better?
Do it because you want to.
The amish do it because they want to.
Are you too much of a pampered little b***h to have a hobby just because something else is better at it than you?
>hundreds of millions of people are gonna take over land, farming equipment production, seed production, industrial fertilizer production, and everyone is gonna be independent from the government
this is so delusional I can't even fathom it
this would require an unprecedented violent revolution and even if it did happen most people would starve to death because gee whiz the entire organized professional farming system has been gutted and replaced by ragtag people who don't have any farming expertise
My point, which I might not have been clear enough about, is if there is an extreme labor surplus due to ai it will be gradual, people can think ahead and just do some gardening and/or raise a cow or two, no revolution required. People are really good at farming and still do it in current year despite the inefficiency of it btw.
I'd invest in Amish stocks if they had any
>People are really good at farming
This is not true.
And there's not any organized effort to help people get educated on these patterns and lifestyle in case they want to try it.
The great majority who try this fail.
>This is not true.
Fair. A more accurate statement would have been "some people are really good at farming and many have the potential to become good at it"
>there's not any organized effort to help people get educated...
Yeah, best we have to learn about this stuff is youtube, I guess?
>Yeah, best we have to learn about this stuff is youtube, I guess?
Yea that's what we reasonably expect but I do not understand why so many smart people fail at doing it still. Did they not watch the right youtube videos? They usually complain that it's very hard and that all their failures quickly built up to systemic failures that were depressing and they just return back to the city.
It's something that probably requires baby steps before jumping into and reading some books, it's probably a holistic way of life and mindset to do it properly.
I'm sure something like the '2 week Minecraft phase' is partially to blame however it's also a lot harder to do anything in real life when compared to media which also cripples your morale, lastly some things are not intuitive to some people and when combined with overconfidence because "I'm smart, I code higher dimensional arrays in some obscure language for funsies in my day to day life, this should be a piece of cake" can lead to them trying to start a fire innawoods by rubbing wet bendy twigs together like they "saw on that tv show one time, trust me bro."
I definitely think gradually working your way towards self sufficiency is a lot easier for most people rather than jumping in the deep end. Layer hens are a good start, they don't take up too much space and give you tons of eggs.
>>Very delusional
>Yeah, it's not like humans used agriculture to survive for tens of thousands of years or anything.
There is no need to go back to individual agriculture. People have machines and roads now. In modern times it takes 1 day of labour to feel 1 person for 1 year. We don't **need** to do any more labour than that.
People living on farms had insanely harsh lives
and yet, we spend much more of our lives working than they did
In a way yea because we work more days per year (you do at least in US) but in terms of the the quality of life during the workdays... it was not nice to spend 12-14 hours per day in the field.
Amish still spend quite a lot of the day doing hard labour
There’s two parts to this. The legitimate fear is that the societal safety net many people rely on will fall apart as governments fail to adapt to a new paradigm. That’s a legitimate concern.
But the worry of a “lack of purpose” is entirely within one’s mind. The “value” of work has been beaten into people cause at present, it’s part of what keeps things moving along, but there is nothing intrinsic to it, it’s just social dogma. Work is not required to live a fulfilling life. Nor do you have to be good at a hobby to enjoy it.
Realistically though, the current phase of AI I think will hit a wall, and we’ll be left with technology just good enough to frick over a bunch of people, but not functional enough to allow a “post scarcity” society.
As for the second, who cares. It’d just be a different kind of butthole running the world, and even if it does happen it most likely won’t be during your lifetime
>no one will have any use to the economy
>the government and corpos will just give me free shit forever so I can sit around and contemplate my life's purpose
lol
at that point of total human uselessness, those in power will start their plan to exterminate the general population, there is no point in keeping assloads of useless dead weight that might rebel against you
>Work is not required to live a fulfilling life
Most people derive their value from the utility they bring. If nothing you do brings any change or value to the world, then everyone will be reduced to Wall-E levels of NEETdom
Sure. But that value doesn’t need to be strictly monetary, nor does the work need to be necessary. And frankly I think a lot people sleepwalk through life just doing whatever they’re told they should be doing
I literally don't care
AI is like an ouroboros in that regard for replacing large sectors of the working classes, it just hasn't become a major issue yet and is why everyone even those in power are apprehensive to fully use it. If too many people are put out of work due to ai theres a chance they'll never be able to get their jobs back, and if everyone is poor and out of work they won't be spending money on the things made by their replacements, which makes the entire thing pointless. Certain industries, particularly the arts, also have very strict rules surrounding ai because they know that certain skills and knowledge have been cultivated over generations and that if they were to let ai run rampant their industry would fall apart after a few generations of people being lazy.
You're basically saying what Marx said about full automation. Prices would collapse, markets would frick off and Communism will ensue.
But modern fans of capitalism disagree with that: https://youtu.be/Gc_nLK4ji_k?t=756
people forget just one lulzy part about this, the CEO can get replaced by AI too
That's the part that I believe to be pure sci-fi. Computers cannot be conscious; they cannot have intentionality and think, so that one aspect will never happen.
Now, very powerful AI systems with desperate, evil slaves employed by those CEOs to direct them properly is possible and scary. Those groups of people will always be able to think outside of the box and compete with other similar groups, so it'll be cutthroat as well.
if it isn't there yet, it'll get there soon enough, unless, obviously, there's a shadow pact (let's not automate ourselves, just the wagies), which is likely to happen, the question there is, where does the piramyd get the cut.
Because I can see greedy shareholders pushing to butcher the CEO pig just so they can get an extra sheckle or two
Most of humanity has lived in miserable conditions compared to modern humans who live in the era of the Industrial Revolution and the Internet.
If we had been born in the pre-Industrial Revolution era, we wouldn't have been able to meditate or contemplate autonomy, or similar concepts except some privileged few
>except some privileged few
like monks, bishops, philosophers who aknoweldged that pursuit of knowledge was not going to grant them a revenue so they just embraced poverty, living in caves and extreme deprivation so that they can keep thinking?
Seems like it even had positives, the only people who didn't have parasites and serious health issues in all of Western European history were the monks that slept in cheap long term stone buildings, they were mostly the only ones that preserved ancient culture
when there's a will, there's a way but it has to be a laser focused will
Is that a brazillian?
>unable to even do fulfiling creative hobbies
bzzt wrong
monetizing them? maybe, but people aren't going to pay shit for ai generated crap when they can make it in their own house, it's a dead end but the concept of money is what is most dead all around
based fello monke schizo
the way I see it AI has the potential to both uplift and sink humanity to great degree
It's on us to provide the good scenario, that indeed means good safety UBI net, keep the artists painting, keep the programmers programming but with a twist,
a) for hobby
b) to further improve AIs capabilities (this will be paid, but ideally, people would do it the same way people contribute to open source projects, for a common good)
long story short, they won't hand us the golden eggs chicken, we have to take it, by force
get militant lad
AI is limited greatly by its input. So all the art AI you see is just a better looking version of whatever coomers and artists were drawing for centuries. Ai is not creative, nothing original will stem from AI. People who take AI seriously are people dont understand high school maths, ie women and leftists
Wise monkey always could find the road
They have always used sharp rocks to crack nuts.
Yea and male cats also spray to mark their territories in the wild but not if you rise them in your apartment, there's no need for that so they never develop the habit.
wholesome post
Another one
We should kickstart planet of the apes by training these frickers, maybe if we get lucky and they learn to code we'll get monke ai and we can have human terminators versus monkinators instead of us just dying to our horrible decisions.
that's pretty neat, send insight to le mars rockets israelite
>I'm extremely concerned about the existential threat that AI poses
AI does not exist. If you believe it does you're mentally defective.
>Ummm akshually the killbot that decapitated you isn't really intelligent, what are you worried about?
No such thing exists, wake up to reality.
The drones that are used in Ukraine are remotely controlled by humans.
I didn't fall for crypto
I didn't fall for covid
I'm not falling for AI
The bar for Artificial "intelligence" keeps getting raised. The Turing test has been broken already yet no one would actually think that these language models are actually intelligent.
If the Turing test has truly been passed, why does everyone spot GPTisms and Claudeisms?
Being able to fool a moron 25% of the time is not passing thr Turing test.
If millions of people read my writing daily, they could probably start figuring out anon-isms too. Having a style doesn't mean you're not intelligent.
Just like with the industrial revolution the bottom jobs are getting replaced. Callcenters and service workers are already on their way out. But that was already the case before AI took off like it does now. Digital ordering exists for decades now. Everything else will just get more efficient and easier.
Now its on politicians to turn this into either less work for everyone or more homeless people.
Id argue its good that nobody needs to pick potatoes from the ground with their hands anymore. The same is true for inputting handwritten postal adresses into a system - that seems like the worst job ever. If anything we should rally behind AI since it will make us more productive with way less work.
Bigger problem is getting society and corporations to actually do that. Same for your skynet question. AI will not try to frick us, the people using it will (and already do).
> Digital ordering exists for decades now. Everything else will just get more efficient and easier.
But it's way more of a mess than it ever was before. Companies have increased tolerance for loss now because logistics is so imperfect. It will probably never be perfected because there is always a human element. Somebody involved in shipping or receiving the goods, natural causes of damage, etc.
The problem is ai potentially can and does encapsule more than just redundant jobs caused by the advent of modern technologies. Switchboard and elevator operators had their occupation because another invention already existed and there was required manual labor to operate them. However we've never gone so far as to completely replace jobs like customer service, medicine, construction, creativity and the arts.
AI won't replace those
Maybe augment but not replace
Like art. Who would go to an art gallery to see shit smeared on a canvas if a human didn't put it there and have some bullshit "message" behind it? Nobody. It can replace low tier design jobs just cranking out things that already existed in 1000 other forms, that's about it. Which are jobs that only exist to serve an invention (computers/internet)
In the seeking of higher profit they will. Also you're generalizing all art as only holding relevance at the highest level. Thats like me saying "oh you bought two new nice pairs of shoes, hey which Balenciagas do you own?". Most of the stuff you own or see like anything printed was made by someone whos job it was to make it aesthetically pleasing to the general population for profit.
So many buzzwords to just say that we need UBI.
yeah thats what i was trying to say. AI will actually make it so we can have UBI
Schizos and autists worry about nothingburgers, it will just become another tool people use to skip through the hassle of programming/art/whatever the frick
It's only useful for learning how to do your work but not in its totality, elements that you're stuck on and need some direction.
For actual work why would you use it? It's full of errors and confusions.
Treat it like a very fast and laser focused search engine.
It's pretty useful for writing code and debugging the code is not that hard. Claude 3 Opus is especially good at it
Maybe if your code is neet projects, like automating the tagging of tendies pictures.
Linear minded boomer
What I'm concerned about is how it's now clear to me that most of the world is replicated by some AI automatically. And big institutions like YouTube are in on it. The music industry is in on it. I'm not sure since when. Maybe since 2000, taking the 90's as base. Or after 2007 / 2009 (the end of early 2000's) Or 2012 (everybody accepted something would happen / change in that year).
It's not bad though, there's enough software and tech to stay busy and the entertainment content can be quite good.
But it makes me wonder if I found some grim fate where I'm isolated in a pod while there's free people outside of it living a more interesting world or a world that feels better physically.
You are pussy.
Replacing human worker with AI is very expensive
>energy cost due to processing power
>AI could produce results that cause damage to company's profits
>Need extra cybersecurity measurements
>can take a lots of time to train AI to handle an task.
Worry not. You'll be long dead before the existential threat of AI becomes real.
...or maybe it's already happening and you don't know it yet? There are subtle signs.
>I'm mostly worried about AI making all human labour obsolete, thereby rendering most people basically useless, unable to even do fulfiling creative hobbies because even that can be done better by machines.
Try actually creating something significant with AI and see how well it works.
I've tried but its instructions were unclear and now the jar has broken in my ass.
It told me that I'm racist and refused to help after that.
Yet to see these "AI" (models. They're fricking MODELS) promises do anything of value to my life. They're probably being used by governments to just target people and believe in them like they're God.
Oh wait they're already doing that. Oh well, off to the knackers yard with me!
>NOOOO NOT LE GLOBOhomosexual BASEDCIETY FULL OF SHIT EATING MONKEY BRAINED moronS
Who cares honestly?
You know you're part of this world, right?
Sure but I really don’t care. The opportunity afforded by AI is much grander than the care for human extinction
Nothing it offers can be worth it if it results in human extinction
Imagine Sam Altman's "World Coin" crypto-currency that he's established as the new global financial system we are all forced into. As the current global economy collapses, Ai will take us into a new dystopic frontier of having to force feed Ai in order for us to live a life without starving. Imagine a future where using products generates digital coins which are used to buy food, housing, entertainment, etc. A future where we are all given micro apartments to dwell in as we enter the Metaverse simulations. I read an article about how these mega corporations are running out of data to feed Ai, that the current internet is simply not enough to keep evolving the LLMs properly. Which sparked an idea that eventually they will put Ai into all electronics in order to feed the Ai. And even that will not be enough, and this endless pursuit for more data will drive humanity into a descent if we're not careful.
>unable to even do fulfiling creative hobbies because even that can be done better by machines
How does this prevent you from doing those hobbies?
bump for CEOs being replaced by AI due to greedy share holders q;^)
Frick the fuddites
Tech corporations have too much to gain and too much to lose not to jump on the AI hype train right now, most of them are faking it. The best example of AI we’ve seen is an autocomplete chatbot on steroids. I’m not saying it’ll never replace a human worker, but like most new technology, it’s just another hype buzzword used to generate investment.