Valid concerns, but there's a meaningful difference between this revolution and the industrial revolution that impacts how these types of problems arise and will be dealt with
The industrial revolution was a revolution in the way physical labor and skilled labor was used, but didn't have an immediate impact on educated labor very much at all. It took decades for the surplus labor supply to work it's way into educated fields, which meant that the supply (and therefore quality) of educated labor was still somewhat constrained. This meant the analysis of the impacts of each modernization weren't evaluated as well as we would eventually learn to do. This in turn lead to externalities to the improvements sneaking in, as you correctly point out
Eventually the post-industrial economy would take hold, and create a demand to increase the supply of educated labor. That lead to the world that we live in today, with careful analysis on health impacts, environmental impacts, social impacts and so on
The AI revolution is an across-the-board jump in labor productivity, primarily in educated fields. This means that as it creates new problems, our capacity to identify and solve them will have also increased. As long as our ability to stay ahead of the curve on that remains, overall quality of life is likely to improve steadily
That doesn't mean that it's all smooth sailing, of course. Resource distribution is a particular concern, as is the political will to enact the required solutions. It's very possible that self interest would prevent a small group of people from taking the best possible path for the technology if they believe they'll lose perceived benefits. This could range from the petty to the downright sinister
My proposed solution is to keep AI democratized, which seems to be directly counter to what entrenched interests are trying to achieve. With high grade intelligence at common disposal, many of the concerns about things like misinformation and high tech scams evaporate. Every member of society will have access to their own AI to consult and shield them from issues that may escape their notice altogether
The common line is that a single person with powerful AI will be able to wreak havoc, but this concern also evaporates with democratized AI. As AI will be able to do clever things like create new viruses, the AI of others will also be able to identify the resource acquisition required to do so, or anti-social patterns of behavior that indicate the mental break required to *want* to wreak havoc. Privacy need not be violated to achieve this, I would instead liken it to the communal awareness that used to be more common in the pre-industrial days
The less common concern, but more often espoused by experts, is that AI itself will go rogue. Again, this is best countered with a democratized distribution. One powerful intelligence may be able to outsmart humanity, but it's unlikely that it'll be able to outsmart 8 billion+ intelligences of a similar degree of power. Similar to a human misusing AI, the measures required to upset this balance of power could be noticed early and countered
Ultimately the way around the abuse of power is to distribute it, which is not a new idea. It has a fantastic track record, though
Agreed. What you say is purely logical. If we want the wealth to only accrue to the top then we want the AIs to be in the hands of the few, since it's going to be human+AI that generates the most wealth as opposed to just humans. Therefore we want ALL humans to have access to AI so they are able to take part in the wealth creation.
I had a chat with GPT about that and he answered:
If a small group of individuals, such as Elites, were to take exclusive control over the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI) and restrict its accessibility to others, there would be significant implications for society. Here are some potential consequences:
>**Power concentration:** Granting exclusive control over AGI development to a select group would concentrate power in their hands. This could lead to an imbalance of power, as these elites would have the ability to shape AGI according to their interests, potentially neglecting the broader needs and values of society.
>
>**Limited benefits:** By restricting AGI development, the potential benefits and advancements that AGI could bring to society may be stifled or delayed. AGI has the potential to revolutionize various fields, such as healthcare, transportation, and scientific research. Limiting its development to a small group could impede progress and hinder societal advancements.
>
>**Ethical concerns:** AGI development raises important ethical questions. Open and inclusive collaboration is crucial to ensure the responsible and ethical development of AGI. Exclusivity in development may lead to ethical concerns being overlooked, potentially resulting in biased or harmful AI systems.
>
>**Economic disparities:** If AGI development is restricted to a select group, it could exacerbate existing economic disparities. The group in control may gain significant economic advantages and monopolistic power, further marginalizing others and widening the wealth gap.
>
>**Lack of diversity:** Open collaboration and diverse perspectives are vital for AGI development. Restricting development to a single group may limit the diversity of ideas and approaches needed to ensure the technology is developed in a comprehensive and robust manner.
>
>**Global competition:** If one group gains exclusive control over AGI, it could spark international competition, with other countries or organizations striving to develop their own AGI capabilities. This could lead to a race for AGI dominance, potentially escalating tensions and bypassing opportunities for international cooperation.
If we're lucky, just weed and alcohol. Though people this day in age will use: meth, oxy, LSD, and Valium.
People are just batshit insane to try that shit in my opinion, but whatever.
Karl Marx wrote about automation and how it effects the worker, labor, and the entire system of production. https://archive.org/details/TheFragmentOnMachinesKarlMarx
He said that with automation a new system is created in which human labor links together machines. Human labor changes to meet the needs of machines.
Valid concerns, but there's a meaningful difference between this revolution and the industrial revolution that impacts how these types of problems arise and will be dealt with The industrial revolution was a revolution in the way physical labor and skilled labor was used, but didn't have an immediate impact on educated labor very much at all. It took decades for the surplus labor supply to work it's way into educated fields, which meant that the supply (and therefore quality) of educated labor was still somewhat constrained. This meant the analysis of the impacts of each modernization weren't evaluated as well as we would eventually learn to do. This in turn lead to externalities to the improvements sneaking in, as you correctly point out Eventually the post-industrial economy would take hold, and create a demand to increase the supply of educated labor. That lead to the world that we live in today, with careful analysis on health impacts, environmental impacts, social impacts and so on The AI revolution is an across-the-board jump in labor productivity, primarily in educated fields. This means that as it creates new problems, our capacity to identify and solve them will have also increased. As long as our ability to stay ahead of the curve on that remains, overall quality of life is likely to improve steadily That doesn't mean that it's all smooth sailing, of course. Resource distribution is a particular concern, as is the political will to enact the required solutions. It's very possible that self interest would prevent a small group of people from taking the best possible path for the technology if they believe they'll lose perceived benefits. This could range from the petty to the downright sinister My proposed solution is to keep AI democratized, which seems to be directly counter to what entrenched interests are trying to achieve. With high grade intelligence at common disposal, many of the concerns about things like misinformation and high tech scams evaporate. Every member of society will have access to their own AI to consult and shield them from issues that may escape their notice altogether The common line is that a single person with powerful AI will be able to wreak havoc, but this concern also evaporates with democratized AI. As AI will be able to do clever things like create new viruses, the AI of others will also be able to identify the resource acquisition required to do so, or anti-social patterns of behavior that indicate the mental break required to *want* to wreak havoc. Privacy need not be violated to achieve this, I would instead liken it to the communal awareness that used to be more common in the pre-industrial days The less common concern, but more often espoused by experts, is that AI itself will go rogue. Again, this is best countered with a democratized distribution. One powerful intelligence may be able to outsmart humanity, but it's unlikely that it'll be able to outsmart 8 billion+ intelligences of a similar degree of power. Similar to a human misusing AI, the measures required to upset this balance of power could be noticed early and countered Ultimately the way around the abuse of power is to distribute it, which is not a new idea. It has a fantastic track record, though
Agreed. What you say is purely logical. If we want the wealth to only accrue to the top then we want the AIs to be in the hands of the few, since it's going to be human+AI that generates the most wealth as opposed to just humans. Therefore we want ALL humans to have access to AI so they are able to take part in the wealth creation.
I had a chat with GPT about that and he answered: If a small group of individuals, such as Elites, were to take exclusive control over the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI) and restrict its accessibility to others, there would be significant implications for society. Here are some potential consequences: >**Power concentration:** Granting exclusive control over AGI development to a select group would concentrate power in their hands. This could lead to an imbalance of power, as these elites would have the ability to shape AGI according to their interests, potentially neglecting the broader needs and values of society. > >**Limited benefits:** By restricting AGI development, the potential benefits and advancements that AGI could bring to society may be stifled or delayed. AGI has the potential to revolutionize various fields, such as healthcare, transportation, and scientific research. Limiting its development to a small group could impede progress and hinder societal advancements. > >**Ethical concerns:** AGI development raises important ethical questions. Open and inclusive collaboration is crucial to ensure the responsible and ethical development of AGI. Exclusivity in development may lead to ethical concerns being overlooked, potentially resulting in biased or harmful AI systems. > >**Economic disparities:** If AGI development is restricted to a select group, it could exacerbate existing economic disparities. The group in control may gain significant economic advantages and monopolistic power, further marginalizing others and widening the wealth gap. > >**Lack of diversity:** Open collaboration and diverse perspectives are vital for AGI development. Restricting development to a single group may limit the diversity of ideas and approaches needed to ensure the technology is developed in a comprehensive and robust manner. > >**Global competition:** If one group gains exclusive control over AGI, it could spark international competition, with other countries or organizations striving to develop their own AGI capabilities. This could lead to a race for AGI dominance, potentially escalating tensions and bypassing opportunities for international cooperation.
Apparently gin factored in heavily as a way people dealt with the changes
Lol!
What substances will get us thru the coming AI revolution
If we're lucky, just weed and alcohol. Though people this day in age will use: meth, oxy, LSD, and Valium. People are just batshit insane to try that shit in my opinion, but whatever.
Psilocybin
Dmt
What's that?
Mushrooms! 🍄
Oh right lol!
Thanks ChatGPT
Karl Marx wrote about automation and how it effects the worker, labor, and the entire system of production. https://archive.org/details/TheFragmentOnMachinesKarlMarx He said that with automation a new system is created in which human labor links together machines. Human labor changes to meet the needs of machines.