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

Raising Children on the Eve of AI

juliawise.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 237 posts

Re: Raising Children on the Eve of AI

#11

Post by throwanem »

Vecr wrote: post #8
rbanffy wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not a huge fan of CS Lewis but the quote at the end is very on point. Let’s continue to be human and do human things. Change will come as it always does.

It's okay I guess if you think you have no causal impact on if any of that happens, but otherwise you better be doing something to help, even if it would only work in a tiny part of probability space, instead of waiting to die.

Why waste time posting here that you could spend weaving mosquito nets, then? Surely this can't be a global maximum in utilon space.

Re: Raising Children on the Eve of AI

#12

Post by inference-lord »

I became a parent about a year ago, completely unprepared for this future. My Son was born around the time ChatGPT-4 was released and I remember all the Geoffrey Hinton interviews which were really apocalyptic sounding, he is has a kind of kookie mad scientist vibe about him too. I remember thinking, like what the fuck just happened? Like I just woke up in a movie.

I've learned to accept the situation, and realize that we can't really predict what will happen so I just try be the best, happiest parent I can to my kids that I can. But I never anticipated the "along for the ride" feeling I have now. Financially planning for 3 years ahead seems quite impossible as I have no idea what type of employment will or will not exist then.

It seems like our careers could just be snuffed out instantly with little recourse available. I say "seems like" because I have no idea if that's real or perceived but it's very hard plan ahead.

I'm kind of glad my child didn't just finished university and planning a career in something that is ripe for disruption because that must be pretty heart breaking, especially because we bring kids up thinking they need a purpose, having a purpose (in my opinion) is a stupid way to live, but not everyone feels that way.

I can't help feel a bit cynical too, like I'm kind of annoyed that realistically, the tech elite of the world are just throwing money at this thing like it's no one else' business and fuck what anyone else thinks about it and fuck how it might impact anyone else because, progress, which at the moment, is code for, "we're about to make copious amounts of money using everyone's IP, a bunch of open source software, and we might give something back, so fuck off.

I'm trying to put the cynicism down, look forwards and hope for the best.

Re: Raising Children on the Eve of AI

#13

Post by keiferski »

I think kids are a lot more prepared for this future than professional technologists probably realize. If you ask them today what profession they want to be, you often get “YouTuber” as an answer. Which might seem like a joke, but I think it’s actually quite accurate in terms of future professions. The jobs at most risk from AI are “anonymous” ones in which the creator of the work is unknown to its consumer. Writing, in a professional context, is a good example. Do you know who wrote the text on Amazon product pages? Probably not.

What is less at risk are charisma-based occupations, like actors or YouTubers. People are social animals and want to connect (or feel like they’re connected) to other humans, not robots. I expect the concept of an influencer to get even bigger.

Ergo, I would tell kids today to focus on social skills, filmmaking skills, and presentation skills.

Re: Raising Children on the Eve of AI

#14

Post by Vecr »

mocamoca wrote: post #10
Vecr wrote: post #2

> Is it even ok to have kids? According to me (utility function, etc) it's required you have kids. Only in the 2.X statistical sense though, but if not what's the point? You can't condition all your problems out, but you at least have to play to not lose.

I don't mean to show a lack of respect for parents and their good will. However, could we say that "you at least have to play to not lose" is a particularly selfish reason for having children? Here, "Playing" is making sure the parents will have caregivers, not that the children will live happy. If the current situation is not worrying enough to rule out having happy kids, what would be the threshold? (Not a rhetoric…

> If the current situation is not worrying enough to rule out having happy kids, what would be the threshold? (Not a rhetorical question)

There is no threshold. Yes, I know Yudkowsky's position, not even there.

> Here, 'Playing' is making sure the parents will have caregivers, not that the children will live happy.

Parents having caregivers hardly comes into it at all.

Re: Raising Children on the Eve of AI

#15

Post by Vecr »

throwanem wrote: post #11
Vecr wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's okay I guess if you think you have no causal impact on if any of that happens, but otherwise you better be doing something to help, even if it would only work in a tiny part of probability space, instead of waiting to die.

Why waste time posting here that you could spend weaving mosquito nets, then? Surely this can't be a global maximum in utilon space.

I'm talking about VNM utility, I'm not a utilitarian or a EA.

Re: Raising Children on the Eve of AI

#16

Post by throwanem »

Vecr wrote: post #15
throwanem wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why waste time posting here that you could spend weaving mosquito nets, then? Surely this can't be a global maximum in utilon space.

I'm talking about VNM utility, I'm not a utilitarian or a EA.

VNM applied in the realm of ethics is definitionally utilitarian.

Re: Raising Children on the Eve of AI

#17

Post by keiferski »

aquarkortwo wrote: post #9
MichaelMug wrote: post #4

> Partly because even in a world where it became clear that school isn’t useful I don’t follow… In what world is school not useful? I suspect the social value of school will become much more apparent soon.

In a world where we have personalized tutors and assistants that can pass on knowledge much more efficiently and effectively than human teachers can.

People keep saying this and I don’t buy it. Kids arent going to learn the best by staring at a computer screen eight hours a day.

If this happens it’ll be because of reduced education funding, not efficiency.

Re: Raising Children on the Eve of AI

#18

Post by dsign »

rbanffy wrote: post #3

One bit of warning: we tend to overestimate the short term impact of new tools while underestimating their long term ones. It’s likely our kids will have recognisable professions with better phones than not. AI will be there assisting us in increasingly sophisticated ways, acting as intelligent agents and maybe even impersonating us at simple interactions. Value and supply chains change slowly and those are the thing…

Let’s assume for a moment that AIs turn up as you say, and that there is nothing nefarious. That outcome will need a lot of foresight and democratic regulation, because market forces will want AIs to exploit people. But, let’s assume we find a political system that is smarter than the people wanting to use AIs for bad ends. So, the world would look very much like the world now, where you earn money proportionally to how difficult is to replace you. There probably will be a set of skills incredibly difficult to get that will earn you enough money to live a comfortable life. And that’s the problem. Even now, lots of people never attain those skills, and they end up working at a factory or at an Amazon fulfillment center. If we don’t fix things somehow, how much worse will it be in the age of AI?

Re: Raising Children on the Eve of AI

#19

Post by AnarchismIsCool »

Vecr wrote: post #2

> Is it even ok to have kids? According to me (utility function, etc) it's required you have kids. Only in the 2.X statistical sense though, but if not what's the point? You can't condition all your problems out, but you at least have to play to not lose.

What is winning and what is losing? Yeah there are actions that persist our genetics but there's no rule saying that's what needs to happen, just that it's something that happens.

If you widen out to society, yeah, there are other people who will come after us, maybe we can have purpose in helping those people to survive even if they're not our kids. Humans evolved as a collective, there are parts of our DNA that exist to help the group even if it means we ourselves don't have kids. Evolution is a much more complicated thing than just specifying exactly what genes -you- pass on.

Re: Raising Children on the Eve of AI

#20

Post by tempodox »

aquarkortwo wrote: post #9
MichaelMug wrote: post #4

> Partly because even in a world where it became clear that school isn’t useful I don’t follow… In what world is school not useful? I suspect the social value of school will become much more apparent soon.

In a world where we have personalized tutors and assistants that can pass on knowledge much more efficiently and effectively than human teachers can.

That assumption would have to be proven first.
Post reply on HN