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

The people who actually want AI to replace humanity

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 99 posts

Re: The people who actually want AI to replace humanity

#61

Post by satisfice »

plastic-enjoyer wrote: post #16
rayiner wrote: post #3

[flagged]

Did you read the article? It's not just about replacing labour with AI but humans as a species to give birth to a machinistic god. The issue is that there is a quasi-religion forming around this ideology, and this are not just a few nutcases but people that are well-connected into industry and politics. Regardless of whether this plan is at all realistic, there is a not insignificant chance that these people will sha…

My fan theory of Terminator: It was never the machines trying to kill humans. It was a handful of billionaires who controlled the machines attempting to kill all non-billionaires. They merely claimed they had no control.

Now I’m thinking that some of those billionaires may have worshipped the machines and convinced themselves that they were helpless. Miraculously, their own families were spared.

Re: The people who actually want AI to replace humanity

#62

Post by ImJamal »

rightbyte wrote: post #44
asdsg wrote: post #35

Humanism needs to be taught in schools again and regain its status as a respected discipline in academia. We thought it was a waste of time because the 1990s were relatively peaceful and tech optimism surged. But you need to teach the classics, philosophy and even religion. No tech people should be allowed near politics in any capacity.

> No tech people should be allowed near politics in any capacity. No we need more politics. The 'no politics' is a petite bourgeoisie moral escape hatch.

The dehumanization push is coming from the tech people.

Re: The people who actually want AI to replace humanity

#63

Post by blacksmith_tb »

theptip wrote: post #48
jleyank wrote: post #21

No well-paid workers (or UBI), no consumer economy. Their call.

This is only a bargaining chip until the robot workers come online. Once capital can fully replace labor it’s game over. (And once the robots outpower the humans, you can’t even protest or overthrow your new overlords.) Important to know when your cards must be played.

Not the OP, but I think the implication is you can't run a consumer economy if the consumers aren't making any wages to buy the products and services those cheap and efficient robots are churning out. Or pay taxes. So the entire socioeconomic system we currently enjoy/endure vanishes, robotic factories included.

Re: The people who actually want AI to replace humanity

#64

Post by general1465 »

blacksmith_tb wrote: post #63
theptip wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is only a bargaining chip until the robot workers come online. Once capital can fully replace labor it’s game over. (And once the robots outpower the humans, you can’t even protest or overthrow your new overlords.) Important to know when your cards must be played.

Not the OP, but I think the implication is you can't run a consumer economy if the consumers aren't making any wages to buy the products and services those cheap and efficient robots are churning out. Or pay taxes. So the entire socioeconomic system we currently enjoy/endure vanishes, robotic factories included.

Exactly. Economy of scale will cease to exists. Thus the demand for robots in the factories will stop making sense - what they would be making for whom? Nobody have money, nobody can buy anything.

So next step, business go bust, because there is just not enough billionaires to keep all of them alive. Another step is states go bust because there is no income to be taxed and there is no capital exchanging hands in buying goods which could be taxed.

Re: The people who actually want AI to replace humanity

#65

Post by spwa4 »

theptip wrote: post #48
jleyank wrote: post #21

No well-paid workers (or UBI), no consumer economy. Their call.

This is only a bargaining chip until the robot workers come online. Once capital can fully replace labor it’s game over. (And once the robots outpower the humans, you can’t even protest or overthrow your new overlords.) Important to know when your cards must be played.

Of course, "playing these cards" may require winning wars. Against China and Russia for starters.

In fact any global policy against self-interest needs at least the credible threat of defeating any other power that may implement such a policy.

And since we're not willing to put in that effort, why discuss it?

Re: The people who actually want AI to replace humanity

#66

Post by rayiner »

dangond wrote: post #54
rayiner wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but just accept it and displace the quasi-slaves? Well, the quasi-slavery is the problem, right? And replacing the Bangladeshi slave labor with robots and AI solves that problem, no?

What happens to that labor if everyone that would hire them previously is now using cheaper artificial labor? They don't exactly have the capital to make use of artificial labor themselves, nor do they have the skills to work other jobs. The problem is solved for the 10% who are citizens. Great! They don't have a moral quandary regarding slave labor anymore (notwithstanding that there are other ways to prevent being…

[flagged]

Re: The people who actually want AI to replace humanity

#67

Post by RiverCrochet »

derektank wrote: post #5

> As it becomes possible to direct our own evolution as a species — and potentially even create a new species that surpasses us — we have to decide: How do we know to what extent it does make sense to transform ourselves using technology? What kinds of augmentation do we want, and what kinds do we absolutely not want? What do we wish, ultimately, to become? This is a moral question, even a spiritual one, and it deman…

The new morality must be that building a world of pleasure for humans is a good thing, as it will make people want to live in the world, instead of a suffering-based world that people will opt out of if robots do everything and suffering isn't necessary.

Re: The people who actually want AI to replace humanity

#69

Post by rayiner »

folkrav wrote: post #31
rayiner wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but just accept it and displace the quasi-slaves? Well, the quasi-slavery is the problem, right? And replacing the Bangladeshi slave labor with robots and AI solves that problem, no?

Is there anything indicating this would be what would happen?

That’s the premise of the hypothetical, because this discussion is about what happens when AI and robots replace humans. The point is the Gulf states are examples of societies that already are effectively “post-human labor” as to citizens.

Re: The people who actually want AI to replace humanity

#70

Post by danaris »

theptip wrote: post #58
justinlivi wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any supposed "AI BDFL" will be controlled by a human. The base concept is inherently flawed.

No.. that’s not what AI succession means. This all supposes a powerful and capable enough AI entity that there is no human in control. Rather than simply asserting that your interlocutors are wrong, you are welcome to advance an argument for why you think this is the case.

If you keep things in the realm of thought experiments, you're allowed to say "OK, play along with my hypothetical here."

Once you're positing things that will/might happen in reality, you need to be willing to accept criticisms of the feasibility of your premises. More, you need to be able to provide evidence of the feasibility of your premises.

You certainly don't get to just tell people, "No, AI succession means AIs will take over. That means you aren't allowed to claim AI's can't take over!"

As things stand, there is zero evidence that any current system is on a trajectory to produce an AI that can operate meaningfully without humans in charge. Even the most sophisticated agentic systems still have humans providing the motivation, the instructions, and all the various linkages that make them capable of acting (even if the motivation and instructions given are purposefully vague or open-ended).

Post reply on HN