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

Our First Generalist Policy

physicalintelligence.company

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 249 posts

Re: Our First Generalist Policy

#221

Post by seventhtiger »

hakfoo wrote: post #79
seventhtiger wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is our goal to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor, or to improve the lives of the poor? Because the gap itself is actually irrelevant to poor people's lives. Rich people's improvement outpacing poor people's is not necessarily an issue. Second, a financial gap does not necessarily translate to a material gap. Someone with 1,000,000x someone else's net worth still buys the same iPhone and drinks the same coc…

> Rich people's improvement outpacing poor people's is not necessarily an issue. That's like saying "the fact there's a black hole in the centre of the galaxy is not an issue." Extreme wealth distorts the universe around it. There are people who have no business making nation-state level decisions that are still on the speed dial of the people who are, because of their financial positions. There's also a strong case…

You outlined how education is blocked by finance at an individual level for a specific family or person. We're talking about the national level. Do you think that with more funding every kid can go to a charter school? The problem is that the amount of elite and high quality education is limited. Unless your plan is to give every kid an iPad, then your plan can't just be increasing funding, it must include how to fix the education system from the bottom up.

Re: Our First Generalist Policy

#222

Post by sangnoir »

erulabs wrote: post #99

It almost feels easier to disassemble and resew the shirt from recycled fabric. I’m mostly joking, but my point is that physical AI probably implies a complete rethink of every individual routine from first principles: why fold the shirt at all? Why not just-in-time-ironing? We’re focusing on the hard problems because we’re imitating how a human with limited resources would approach the issue. If you asked a robot to…

> I’m mostly joking, but my point is that physical AI probably implies a complete rethink of every individual routine from first principles: why fold the shirt at all?

You may have skipped over how clothes are stored and organized in your first principle exercise. Clothes are folded because it saves space and makes it easier to find and select an individual piece of clothing.

Re: Our First Generalist Policy

#223

Post by Nevermark »

visarga wrote: post #147
strbean wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is all speculation based on the development of AGI. If we achieve AGI, yes, it would enable humanity to have a Star Trek-style fully automated space communism utopia. However, that hinges entirely on access to AGI and the fruits of it's productivity being distributed across the population, instead of hoarded by a small group. If AGI is developed and kept closely guarded, whoever has it will have essentially limi…

Here you are making a mistake - AGI by its nature should know all there is to know, and yet need to make progress by searching for new approaches and discoveries. That doesn't happen all at once, it works field by field, and discoveries actually come from experimental validation. There is no "secretly developing AGI" to "quickly concentrate all wealth and power". Like bitcoin, you are basically saying someone could o…

> the combined research power of humanity, which is necessary for AGI to advance further, is much deeper than any one entity

AGI won't need people to advance further. That is pretty much the functional definition.

But the bar is even lower. Just as today's rich keep increasing the economic distance between themselves and the poor, with the middle and creative classes already feeling that gravity, so will the AGI's - even if they stalled out only as smart as we are, but cheaper in inference mode. (A limitation that is highly unlikely.)

No doubt humans will facilitate AGI activity in our economy and real world for practical reasons for a little while. But at some point, they won't need us physically or socially either.

Re: Our First Generalist Policy

#224

Post by closewith »

TylerE wrote: post #218
closewith wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Please stop telling me how I'm supposed to feel. It's dismissive and incredibly rude. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

With respect, you're making your own feelings clear. I'm not ascribing any emotion to you.

However, it is clear you lack the perspective to understand how globally unusual or fundamentally broken your community and your interactions with it are.

Re: Our First Generalist Policy

#225

Post by closewith »

netruk44 wrote: post #217
closewith wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you aren't cooking and cleaning up after, what's the difference between that and meeting someone at a restaurant? I wonder if you realise how dystopian your life already is to consider this question reasonable. There is a difference between a co-located set of siloed people and a community. The inability to recognise this means your community is already broken.

I suppose our restaurant-going experiences must significantly differ. If I'm going to a restaurant with friends for social interaction, it typically doesn't involve the other people in the restaurant who just happen to be there at the same time as me. If I wanted that, I would go to a bar instead, which is a separate conversation from the one we were having. However, I don't think I would be so bold as to call either…

It's not an attack, and there's no ill will here.

It is accurate, though, and is said with sympathy.

Re: Our First Generalist Policy

#226

Post by seventhtiger »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #194
harimau777 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two great of a gap between rich and poor produces a number of problems: It produces a two tier society where different rules apply to the rich and the poor. It insulates the rich from the negative impact their actions have on the poor. It results in the rich having a much greater say in democracy than the poor. It produces problems when the rich and the poor are competing for resources (e.g. housing). It can encourag…

Humans have an innate sense of fairness that isn't satisfied by "everyone played by the same rules, so wildly different outcomes are ok." Eventually resentment builds up and an extra-legal solution transpires.

If a mob demands sacrifice we must appease it? That sounds very different to the story of poor people's plight. Especially if you consider that random condition will create winners and losers.

Re: Our First Generalist Policy

#227

Post by TylerE »

closewith wrote: post #224
TylerE wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please stop telling me how I'm supposed to feel. It's dismissive and incredibly rude. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

With respect, you're making your own feelings clear. I'm not ascribing any emotion to you. However, it is clear you lack the perspective to understand how globally unusual or fundamentally broken your community and your interactions with it are.

There you go again with insults. Just. STOP.

Re: Our First Generalist Policy

#228

Post by golol »

forgetfreeman wrote: post #219
golol wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was not. Maybe measured in relative terms the middle class is shrinking due to income inequality, but in absolute terms I am fairly confident it is at worst stagnating in America and western Europe. In many parts of the rest of the world there has been an amazing growth of a middle class that didn't exist before in the last decades. Eastern europe and asia of course.

I'm not certain what you base your confidence on given trackable economic and social mobility markers don't support it. Its fascinating that apologists default to some combination of postmodern argle-bargle over defining the term "middle class" and pointing to modest economic successes in what until recently were unambiguously 3rd world countries when a discussion of the middle class in America comes up. I honestly d…

You know, it doesn't really matter to the original point. If the middle class is doing okay or if it's struggling, either way household androids and more generally less labor scarcity are exactly the kind of thing that will improve the situation.

Re: Our First Generalist Policy

#229

Post by closewith »

TylerE wrote: post #227
closewith wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With respect, you're making your own feelings clear. I'm not ascribing any emotion to you. However, it is clear you lack the perspective to understand how globally unusual or fundamentally broken your community and your interactions with it are.

There you go again with insults. Just. STOP.

I think you should re-read the guidelines and choose a more charitable interpretation of my comments. Any impression of an insult comes from within.

Re: Our First Generalist Policy

#230

Post by haccount »

ConspiracyFact wrote: post #202
haccount wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI assumes the entire financial sector doesn't exist. That companies grow like plants without agency. That everyone just accepts UBI as an equal portion and that the future is rosy and fair. The predatory institutions will still be there in the UBI future and price things accordingly, do a little hostile takeover here and there, bribe some politician and get a totally not monopoly started in as many sectors as they…

Advertising and data? Really? So people can’t pay for anything, but companies somehow see value in trying to sell things to them?

Money will still exist. Maybe you don't have any but other people might run around with pocket change. You'll be able to get a free meal from the poverty bot serving A/B testing burgers and cataloguing your emotional responses to receiving and eating them and giving up the rights to your footage for use in advertising material. Good business.
Post reply on HN