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

Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better

darioamodei.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 132 posts

Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better

#81

Post by exe34 »

throwaway14356 wrote: post #44
exe34 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Throughout human history, there have been practices of contemplation, recognition of interdependence, and ways of increasing our capacity for compassion and thoughful response. has this ever been widespread in society? I think such people have always been few and far between?

you are living in it. The default state is to have extremely poor hard working people and extremely rich not working ones. No one would have dared to dream of the luxury working people enjoy today. It took some doing! We use to sell people not to long ago. Kids in coal mines. The work week was 6-7 days 12-14 hours. One coin per day etc The fight isn't over, the owner class won the last few rounds but there remains mu…

what does "practices of contemplation, recognition of interdependence, and ways of increasing our capacity for compassion and thoughful response." have to do with luxury? it sounds like you're arguing for the opposite? scrolling Instagram isn't the contemplation I have in mind.

Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better

#82

Post by jaredhallen »

ManuelKiessling wrote: post #46
KaiserPro wrote: post #4

One of the sad things about tech is that nobody really looks at history. The same kinds of essays were written about trains, planes and nuclear power. Before lindbergh went off the deepend, he was convinced that "airmen" were gentlemen and could sort out the world's ills. The essay contains a lot of coulds, but doesn't touch on the base problem: human nature. AI will be used to make things cheaper. That is, lots of j…

I do not agree with the following: > But those profits will not be shared. Human productivity has exploded in the last 120 years, yet we are working longer hours for less pay. I am, however, criticizing this in isolation — that is, my goal is not to invalidate (nor validate, for that matter) the rest of your text; only this specific point. So, I do not agree. We are clearly working a lot less hours than 120 or even 6…

We get more material goods, to be sure. But do we get more satisfaction out of our lives? More happiness? More joy?

Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better

#83

Post by chairmansteve »

ManuelKiessling wrote: post #46
KaiserPro wrote: post #4

One of the sad things about tech is that nobody really looks at history. The same kinds of essays were written about trains, planes and nuclear power. Before lindbergh went off the deepend, he was convinced that "airmen" were gentlemen and could sort out the world's ills. The essay contains a lot of coulds, but doesn't touch on the base problem: human nature. AI will be used to make things cheaper. That is, lots of j…

I do not agree with the following: > But those profits will not be shared. Human productivity has exploded in the last 120 years, yet we are working longer hours for less pay. I am, however, criticizing this in isolation — that is, my goal is not to invalidate (nor validate, for that matter) the rest of your text; only this specific point. So, I do not agree. We are clearly working a lot less hours than 120 or even 6…

You are right, but the average person is less happy than in 1970.

Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better

#84

Post by musicale »

ManuelKiessling wrote: post #46
KaiserPro wrote: post #4

One of the sad things about tech is that nobody really looks at history. The same kinds of essays were written about trains, planes and nuclear power. Before lindbergh went off the deepend, he was convinced that "airmen" were gentlemen and could sort out the world's ills. The essay contains a lot of coulds, but doesn't touch on the base problem: human nature. AI will be used to make things cheaper. That is, lots of j…

I do not agree with the following: > But those profits will not be shared. Human productivity has exploded in the last 120 years, yet we are working longer hours for less pay. I am, however, criticizing this in isolation — that is, my goal is not to invalidate (nor validate, for that matter) the rest of your text; only this specific point. So, I do not agree. We are clearly working a lot less hours than 120 or even 6…

Wage increases have been lagging productivity increases for about 60 years.[1]

For the past 35 years or so, automation seems to have driven wage inequality, and AI is headed down the same path.[2,3]

[1] https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

[2] https://news.mit.edu/2020/study-inks-automation-inequality-0...

[3] https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/19/1049378/ai-inequ...

Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better

#85

Post by musicale »

kranke155 wrote: post #9
KaiserPro wrote: post #4

One of the sad things about tech is that nobody really looks at history. The same kinds of essays were written about trains, planes and nuclear power. Before lindbergh went off the deepend, he was convinced that "airmen" were gentlemen and could sort out the world's ills. The essay contains a lot of coulds, but doesn't touch on the base problem: human nature. AI will be used to make things cheaper. That is, lots of j…

We are entering a dystopia and people are still writing these wonderful essays about how AI will help us. Microtargeted psychometrics (Cambridge Analytica, AggregateIQ) have already made politics in the West an unending barrage of information warfare. Now we'll have millions of autonomous agents. At some point soon in the future, our entire feed will be AI content or upvoted by AI or AI manipulating the algorithm. It…

As long as there is money to be made or power to be gained, any technology will be used to get it, especially if the negative effects are externalities that the technology developers and users are not liable for.

Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better

#86

Post by musicale »

ManuelKiessling wrote: post #46
KaiserPro wrote: post #4

One of the sad things about tech is that nobody really looks at history. The same kinds of essays were written about trains, planes and nuclear power. Before lindbergh went off the deepend, he was convinced that "airmen" were gentlemen and could sort out the world's ills. The essay contains a lot of coulds, but doesn't touch on the base problem: human nature. AI will be used to make things cheaper. That is, lots of j…

I do not agree with the following: > But those profits will not be shared. Human productivity has exploded in the last 120 years, yet we are working longer hours for less pay. I am, however, criticizing this in isolation — that is, my goal is not to invalidate (nor validate, for that matter) the rest of your text; only this specific point. So, I do not agree. We are clearly working a lot less hours than 120 or even 6…

> We get SO much more for our monthly paycheck today

Many goods are cheaper, and electronics are vastly better, but housing, health care, and higher education costs have outpaced inflation for decades.

Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better

#87

Post by CaptainFever »

musicale wrote: post #84
ManuelKiessling wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not agree with the following: > But those profits will not be shared. Human productivity has exploded in the last 120 years, yet we are working longer hours for less pay. I am, however, criticizing this in isolation — that is, my goal is not to invalidate (nor validate, for that matter) the rest of your text; only this specific point. So, I do not agree. We are clearly working a lot less hours than 120 or even 6…

Wage increases have been lagging productivity increases for about 60 years.[1] For the past 35 years or so, automation seems to have driven wage inequality, and AI is headed down the same path.[2,3] [1] https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ [2] https://news.mit.edu/2020/study-inks-automation-inequality-0... [3] https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/19/1049378/ai-inequ...

Note that the famous EPI graph in your first source appears to be controversial with mainstream economists: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskEconomics/comments/12kk79k/what_...

(However, there seems to be other sources that say the same thing, despite criticism of EPI's graph. So I'm not sure. It seems to be consensus that it has been stagnating or not keeping up with productivity for low skilled workers, though? But I can't find much about wage or compensation compared to productivity for high skilled workers [e.g. programmers, AI engineers]).

Furthermore, your comment focused on wages, where your parent comment specifically claimed that wages were less important than "how much work it takes to buy something similar, like steak, compared to the past". It misses the point.

Finally, I admit I haven't seen the latter two sources, but in my layman's opinion, inequality isn't necessarily bad if all needs are met.

Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better

#88

Post by CaptainFever »

chairmansteve wrote: post #83
ManuelKiessling wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not agree with the following: > But those profits will not be shared. Human productivity has exploded in the last 120 years, yet we are working longer hours for less pay. I am, however, criticizing this in isolation — that is, my goal is not to invalidate (nor validate, for that matter) the rest of your text; only this specific point. So, I do not agree. We are clearly working a lot less hours than 120 or even 6…

You are right, but the average person is less happy than in 1970.

Source?

Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better

#89

Post by KaiserPro »

roenxi wrote: post #48
KaiserPro wrote: post #4

One of the sad things about tech is that nobody really looks at history. The same kinds of essays were written about trains, planes and nuclear power. Before lindbergh went off the deepend, he was convinced that "airmen" were gentlemen and could sort out the world's ills. The essay contains a lot of coulds, but doesn't touch on the base problem: human nature. AI will be used to make things cheaper. That is, lots of j…

> AI will be used to make things cheaper. That is, lots of job losses. must of us are up for the chop if/when competent AI agents become possible. > But those profits will not be shared. Human productivity has exploded in the last 120 years, yet we are working longer hours for less pay. Don't you have to pick one? It seems a bit disjointed to simultaneously complain that we are all losing our jobs and that we are wor…

I did not argue that cogently.

At each "node" of the industrial revolution, lots of workers were displaced. (weavers, scriveners, printers, car mechanics). Those workers were highly paid because they were highly skilled.

Productivity made things cheaper to make, because it removed the expensive labour required to make it.

That means less well paid jobs with controlled hours. This leads to poorly paid jobs with high competition and poor hours.

Yes new highly paid jobs were created, but not for the people who were dispossessed by the previous "node".

> If machines get so productive that we don't need to work, everyone losing their jobs isn't a long-term problem

who is going to pay for them? not the people who are making the profits.

Re: Machines of loving grace: How AI could transform the world for the better

#90

Post by KaiserPro »

startupsfail wrote: post #54
KaiserPro wrote: post #4

One of the sad things about tech is that nobody really looks at history. The same kinds of essays were written about trains, planes and nuclear power. Before lindbergh went off the deepend, he was convinced that "airmen" were gentlemen and could sort out the world's ills. The essay contains a lot of coulds, but doesn't touch on the base problem: human nature. AI will be used to make things cheaper. That is, lots of j…

The responsibility the airmen take when they take passengers off the ground (holding their lives in their hands) is a serious one. The types of Trump are unlikely to get a license or accumulate enough Pilot In Command hours an not be an accident, and the experience itself changes the person. If I have a choice of who to trust, between an airman or not airman, I’d likely choose an airman. And I’m not sure what you are…

You neatly sum up his world view. He thought that Airmen were the pinnacle of civility. He didn't want a fight using planes, because that would be unsporting.

> And I’m not sure what you are referring to about Lindbergh

Well, he thought that he jews were pushing for WWII.

https://alba-valb.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Lindbergh_1... He also wanted to maintain friendly relations with Goering.

Post reply on HN