281–290 of 298 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone seriously trust in the fairytale that the rich and powerful gives 95% of their profit back to customers? It's not really what they've built their business empires for.
The U.S. had a top tax tier of 95% in de 1940's.
If A.I. starts to replace jobs en masse I propose we tax the companies profiting from this at a rate of 95% so we can finance welfare and Universal Basic Income schemes. We need to be aware that said companies and the people behind them will do anything in their power, including bribing politicians, to prevent this and to keep the money they believe are they're entitled to. I even believe the Big Tech bigwigs have lo…
> If A.I. starts to replace jobs en masse But then nobody will have money to buy anything anymore, then nobody will have money to pay the AI companies, and then they won't have any money. The jobless will starve to death and then those who have their food made by robots will reign over an empty world where money has become meaningless. LLMs and robots don't eat money, they eat electricity.
If we don't tax these A.I. Moguls these times will return.
It's fascinating to me that there's no one in this thread arguing that AI is a bubble and it's all going to crash soon.
So if there's a crash, doesn't that just leave us with a bunch of useful AI hardware whose costs have been written off? I wouldn't have thought that much changes what social impacts AI is going to have.
If A.I. starts to replace jobs en masse I propose we tax the companies profiting from this at a rate of 95% so we can finance welfare and Universal Basic Income schemes. We need to be aware that said companies and the people behind them will do anything in their power, including bribing politicians, to prevent this and to keep the money they believe are they're entitled to. I even believe the Big Tech bigwigs have lo…
> I even believe the Big Tech bigwigs have long foreseen this and are quietly prodding our society towards an authoritarian regime where people have no say so they can keep their moonies. That's been obvious for a while.
I do not believe Zuck, Musk, or any of the other boogeyman in Silicon Valley are capable of that level of deception and manipulation.
I find it much more plausible that when trying to build world-changing businesses and products you squish, displace, and flip tables when you didn't really intend to.
I am not optimistic. What we learned from history is that despite all warnings and good intentions, governments, corps and citizens will make every possible mistake before we finally arrive at another precariously stable situation. Experts are famously bad at predicting the outcomes of new technologies/policies even in times of relatively low upheaval. And plans have a way of producing many significant unintended con…
If A.I. starts to replace jobs en masse I propose we tax the companies profiting from this at a rate of 95% so we can finance welfare and Universal Basic Income schemes. We need to be aware that said companies and the people behind them will do anything in their power, including bribing politicians, to prevent this and to keep the money they believe are they're entitled to. I even believe the Big Tech bigwigs have lo…
UBI is a farce, and is the wealth class's yet another lever to control people. UBI will not be "universal", not in this human civilization of hyper stratification. Conditions will be placed, and only certain ethnicity, and somehow certain people will receive two to ten times as much as others. If this proposed and impossible gift farce happens at all. How gullible are you to think this UBI concept has anything but wi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should probably read the history of anarchism in Imperial Russia. There were tons of assassination attempts against the tsars in the 1800s, and they even killed a tsar. Yet the empire fell due to an external war, roughly 100 years later. Aristocracy became useless around 1600-1700, when gunpowder meant that peasant armies took over instead of knights, yet it took between 200 and 400 years for full legal equality…
> Aristocracy became useless around 1600-1700, when gunpowder meant that peasant armies took over instead of knights Does this view rest on the claim that the only use of the aristocracy is warfare?
Clergy to protect from the gods, nobility to protect from other organized groups of humans, peasants to provide food and beasts of burden, artisans to build things.
Of course, once a class that doesn't have to do backbreaking work is established, rooting them out is difficult. The clergy was also hard to reduce.
I'm not trying to be facetious, but what are the benefits of "general purpose intelligence"? With machine learning it was obvious what task we were trying to automate, and you could take a stab at the productivity achieved.
That's not the case now. You can't figure out if the time it took to review a 5k loc PR balances out the time saved debugging a syntax error.
Yes we know you can churn out your damn CRUD apps and (hope) to make money (PS, you don't need AI to make money - see exhibit A: crypto bros).
So what benefits has this actually brought to humanity?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I even believe the Big Tech bigwigs have long foreseen this and are quietly prodding our society towards an authoritarian regime where people have no say so they can keep their moonies. That's been obvious for a while.
I hear this repeated a lot, but I'm skeptical they're that smart. Hanlon's razor would say it's just the system doing what the system does. I do not believe Zuck, Musk, or any of the other boogeyman in Silicon Valley are capable of that level of deception and manipulation. I find it much more plausible that when trying to build world-changing businesses and products you squish, displace, and flip tables when you didn…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does anyone still believe that AI will replace jobs? I get further proof every day that it never will.
I agree with you that it probably won't replace jobs, but it will let you get more done in less time. I suspect, based on some of the stuff I've read recently, that two days with AI assistance are as exhausting/wearing as five days without, because you're trying to keep up with AI speed (another argument for slower LLMs on a local machine). Unfortunately, I think we will also see corporate expectations that if you ca…
For example your AI generated code feels very productive and "more done in less time", until you have to spend 3 times as much reviewing it, and supporting it long term compared to code written before AI.
People mistake instant gratification for long term productivity gains.