Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Moore's Law for Everything

moores.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 554 posts

Re: Moore's Law for Everything

#121

Post by naringas »

csomar wrote: post #103

> democracy can become antagonistic as people seek to vote money away from each other. ... > We should therefore focus on taxing capital rather than labor I find it amazing that these "thinkers" don't see the irony. You are "afraid" that people are going to vote you away from your wealth via democracy; but then you feel privileged to decide how this wealth should be taxed. Since AIs are getting smarter than humans, m…

> Since AIs are smarter than humans, why bother teaching humans at all? Unless there is a point where a developed human brain could outsmart the AI, it seems to be a waste and emotionally guided.

taking this point and running off with it. why bother having humans at all? let's all become a simulation and live within a computer.

Re: Moore's Law for Everything

#122

Post by csomar »

chishaku wrote: post #109
csomar wrote: post #103

> democracy can become antagonistic as people seek to vote money away from each other. ... > We should therefore focus on taxing capital rather than labor I find it amazing that these "thinkers" don't see the irony. You are "afraid" that people are going to vote you away from your wealth via democracy; but then you feel privileged to decide how this wealth should be taxed. Since AIs are getting smarter than humans, m…

> emotionally guided > move forward What do you mean by these phrases? Can you elaborate on your framework for value?

> emotionally guided

As humans, we emotionally feel sympathy toward other animals of the human race. Bonus points if they look similar (ethnically).

> move forward

Without honestly realizing what an AI driven world means, any "solution" is just vaporware talks, and will probably mean we are not ready when the shift happens.

Re: Moore's Law for Everything

#123

Post by nindalf »

> We will discover new jobs–we always do after a technological revolution

CGP grey put this well

> Imagine a pair of horses in the early 1900s talking about technology. One worries all these new mechanical muscles (cars etc) will make horses unnecessary. The other horse reminds him that everything so far has made their lives easier - remember all that farm work? Remember running coast-to-coast delivering mail? Remember riding into battle? All terrible! These new city jobs are pretty cushy, and with so many humans in the cities there will be more jobs for horses than ever. Even if this car thingy takes off, he might say, there will be new jobs for horses we can't imagine.

> But you know what happened. There are still working horses, but nothing like before. The horse population peaked in 1915 - from that point on it was nothing but down.

> There's no law of economics that says that better technology makes more better jobs for horses. It sounds shockingly dumb to even say that out loud. But swap horses for humans and suddenly people think it sounds about right.

"Humans need not apply" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

Re: Moore's Law for Everything

#124

Post by AnimalMuppet »

naringas wrote: post #121
csomar wrote: post #103

> democracy can become antagonistic as people seek to vote money away from each other. ... > We should therefore focus on taxing capital rather than labor I find it amazing that these "thinkers" don't see the irony. You are "afraid" that people are going to vote you away from your wealth via democracy; but then you feel privileged to decide how this wealth should be taxed. Since AIs are getting smarter than humans, m…

> Since AIs are smarter than humans, why bother teaching humans at all? Unless there is a point where a developed human brain could outsmart the AI, it seems to be a waste and emotionally guided. taking this point and running off with it. why bother having humans at all? let's all become a simulation and live within a computer.

But, by your exact same logic: Why bother having humans even within the simulation? An AI will out-perform them there as well.

I suggest that the original logic was flawed...

Re: Moore's Law for Everything

#125

Post by jessriedel »

zz865 wrote: post #81

I still dont really know about AI taking over the world. The most expensive things in my budget are housing, car, healthcare, childcare, flights/hotels, food. Does AI really change that much? There are definitely too many over-educated people out there already, I'd think this is more of an impact & setting up disappointment than the bots.

The time you spend in your car is more valuable than the cost of the car itself (including gas, repairs, etc). So insofar as you can free that time with an autonomous vehicle, it can absolutely slash the total cost of transportation.

To a lesser extent, similar things can be said about your other examples.

Re: Moore's Law for Everything

#126

Post by goesnowhere »

tvanantwerp wrote: post #26

Imagine: 1) I'm the owner of a single family home 2) My income drops to roughly zero because of AI 3) My property values go through the roof 4) I now owe 2.5% of these sky-rocketing property values every year, to be paid from my non-existent income Doesn't this scenario lead to me either selling my "gifted" shares to pay property taxes, or ending up a renter at best and homeless at worst? I can imagine this proposal…

A land value tax taxes the value of the land not the things built on it. It hurts speculators/landlords and benefits people who build/improve.

It works very differently than a propery tax.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ok2uR3btMrE

Re: Moore's Law for Everything

#127

Post by stevenhuang »

csomar wrote: post #103

> democracy can become antagonistic as people seek to vote money away from each other. ... > We should therefore focus on taxing capital rather than labor I find it amazing that these "thinkers" don't see the irony. You are "afraid" that people are going to vote you away from your wealth via democracy; but then you feel privileged to decide how this wealth should be taxed. Since AIs are getting smarter than humans, m…

> The reality is, there is no place for humans in an AI driven world where AI is smarter than humans and robots can make stuff.

You need to read more sci-fi. The Culture series by Ian Banks is a good start.

Of course there is dystopic fiction too, but the point is there are many possibilities of what life post-ai may look like

Nothing says it has to work out the way you think so stating that so confidently is unwarranted.

Re: Moore's Law for Everything

#128

Post by Robotbeat »

heleninboodler wrote: post #117
Aunche wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think launching sports cars into orbit is inherently any more wasteful than say the development of the Deep Blue chess computer. It may have been a vanity project, but the ultimate goal was to test a proof of concept.

I didn't say it was wasteful or make any judgments about it. It's just a fact that a level of lifestyle that allows a person to launch his personal sports car into space has been achieved.

I would say the Dear Moon project is more of an example than launching the car. The car was just for an initial test flight. It took the place of a block of aluminum like in one of the Falcon 1 launches.

Re: Moore's Law for Everything

#129

Post by visarga »

zz865 wrote: post #81

I still dont really know about AI taking over the world. The most expensive things in my budget are housing, car, healthcare, childcare, flights/hotels, food. Does AI really change that much? There are definitely too many over-educated people out there already, I'd think this is more of an impact & setting up disappointment than the bots.

> Does AI really change that much?

About all the things you listed - housing, transportation, education, food and travel are being impacted by digitization and AI.

Re: Moore's Law for Everything

#130

Post by msikora »

> technological progress follows an exponential curve

This is a mantra that I keep hearing, but if I compare the progress from 1900 to 1960 and then from 1960 to 2020, it almost seems like it has been flattening... Sure, we have internet and fancy computers, but the progress from 1900 to 1960 was immense: air travel, electrification, proliferation of automobiles, immense progress in medicine, space exploration, nuclear energy. Even the MOSFET transistor was invented in 1959.

Not saying there wasn't any progress between 1960 and 2020, but it sure doesn't look "accelerating"...

Post reply on HN