W40K Machine God incoming
Replacement.ai
361–370 of 725 posts
Re: Replacement.ai
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s worth (re)watching the 1985 movie Brazil in particular the character of Harry Tuttle, hearing engineer https://youtu.be/VRfoIyx8KfU Neither government or corporations are going to “save us” simply because sheer short termism and incompetence. But the seem incompetence will make the coming dystopia ridiculous
I do wonder if somewhere like China might be better off - they might not have muh freedumb, but their government seems keen to look after the majority and fund things that corporations wouldn't.
"China might be better off"
Uh...
Re: Replacement.ai
#363Personal belief, but robots coming for your jobs is not a valid argument against robots. If robots can do a job better and/or faster, they should be the ones doing the jobs. Specialization is how we got to the future. So the problem isn't robots, it's the structure of how we humans rely on jobs for income. I don't necessarily feel like it's the AI company's problem to fix either. This is what government is for, and n…
> Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
-- Frank Herbert, Dune
The "government" is just the set of people who hold power over others.
Those who will own machines that can match humans will have unprecedented power over others. In effect they'll grow more and more to be the government.
Even now, companies hold more and more of the power over others and are more part of the government than ever before.
So it confuses me when you say it's what the government is for? Who would that be? If we pretend it would still be a democracy then I guess you're saying it's everyone's problem?
So here we are, let's discuss the solution and vote for it?
Re: Replacement.ai
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think we should be careful attributing too much idealism to it. The Luddites were not a unified movement and people had much more urgent concerns than thinking about technological progress from a sociocentric perspective. Considering the time period with the Napoleonic Wars as backdrop I don't think anyone can blame them for simply being angry and wanting to smash the machines that made them lose their job.
>wanting to smash the machines that made them lose their job. Wondering how long before people start setting datacenters on fire.
And how well those attempts fare. Data centers aren't exactly fortified, but they have a lot of focus on access control and redundancy, and usually have good fire suppression (except OVH apparently).
Maybe ChatGPT has some ideas on how to best attack data centers /s
Re: Replacement.ai
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're already here. Most jobs are fake.
It seems like the _quality_ of the jobs (or median job) may have gone down, but the _quantity_ of jobs relative to population has remained roughly steady, right?
I don't mean the quality is bad, it's just that most jobs in the first world seem to be redundant or abstracted from the keys of power.
I think David Graeber wrote a book about it. Here is a guy talking about it:
Re: Replacement.ai
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re right and validating the point. A specific part of GP’s comment keeps getting overlooked: So the problem isn't robots, it's the structure of how we humans rely on jobs for income. Humans being forced to trade time for survival, money, and the enrichment of the elite, is a bug. We are socially conditioned to believe it’s a feature and the purpose. Nobody is saying robots should replace human connection and expr…
> > Humans derive a lot of meaning from being useful and valued. Sure, humans relying on jobs for income is a problem with transitions. But people finding purpose in jobs is a problem, too. Right now how we get there is being "forced to' -- and indeed that's a bug. But if we transition to a future where it's pretty hard to find useful work, that's a problem, even if the basic needs for survival are still being met. I…
Thanks for sharing. Absolutely right; people need to feel useful and valued—not to mention, jobs can help us get out of the house and connect with people.
Just to be clear, are you saying the only life work that you can find fulfillment in is work that can be perfectly automated and handled by AI? Do you have an example of what you mean?
Re: Replacement.ai
#367You don't need money. What you need is wealth. I am going to leave it to PG to explain the difference [1]: Wealth is not money. Wealth is stuff we want: food, clothes, houses, cars, gadgets, travel to interesting places, and so on. You can have wealth without having money. If you had a magic machine that could on command make you a car or cook you dinner or do your laundry, or do anything else you wanted, you wouldn'…
We already have systems that create unprecedented wealth: industrial economies. And yet we let billions live and die without proper healthcare, nutrition, housing, and so on. The promise you make -- that with increases in productive capacity will clearly come an end to want -- has already been shown to be a lie. Please stop peddling it.
Quality of life has greatly improved since the 1970s.
Consumer goods have generally fallen in price (adjusted for inflation) while improving in quality relative to the 1970s, so we have become wealthier (using PG's definition of wealth):
Televisions, computers, smartphones, clothing (mass-produced apparel is cheaper due to global supply chains and automation), household appliances (items like refrigerators, washing machines, and microwaves are less expensive relative to income), air travel, telecommunications, consumer electronics, automobiles, furniture have fallen in price and gone up in quality.
Housing and healthcare are two items that have gone in the opposite direction. I think this is where AI and robots will make a difference. Houses can be 3D printed [1] and nursing and medical advice can be made cheaper using AI/robots as well.
Re: Replacement.ai
#368[flagged]
Your marriage is a decision between you and your spouse and is a mutual decision. A job is a decision that your boss(es) made and can be taken without your consent. You don't have the ownership of your job that you do of your marriage.
Bosses should be able to make decisions about jobs or AI. That ok.
But as a society we have to ask ourselves if replacing all jobs with AI will make for a better society. Life is not all about making as much money as possible. For a working society citizen need meaning in their lives, and safety, and food, and health. If most people get too little of this, it may disrupt society, and cause wars and riots.
This is where government needs to step in, uncontrolled enterprise greed will destroy countries. But companies don´t care, they'll just move to another country. And the ultra-rich don´t care, they'll just put larger walls around their houses or move country.
Re: Replacement.ai
#369Personal belief, but robots coming for your jobs is not a valid argument against robots. If robots can do a job better and/or faster, they should be the ones doing the jobs. Specialization is how we got to the future. So the problem isn't robots, it's the structure of how we humans rely on jobs for income. I don't necessarily feel like it's the AI company's problem to fix either. This is what government is for, and n…
Ah yes, our government where career politicians from both sides have bent the rules to create 9-10 figure fortunes.
Re: Replacement.ai
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course government has the authority to represent the people; if not it, then who or what does?
I didn't say government doesn't have the power to represent the people, now did I?
You wrote:
> Government no longer has the power or authority to constrain private enterprise; especially in highly technical sectors.
Perhaps you meant only this: "Government no longer has the power ..."? It is clear government still has the authority based on the will of the people.