If “put it to good use” means the value of human labor drops to zero, and everyone loses their job to ASI, then violent resistance is inevitable.
It definitely is (and I would encourage that even). But such resistance cannot be luddite if it actually wants to win. Therefore, its goal cannot be "no AI", but rather "AI used for the benefit of society".
With ASI there is no way that we can control it with absolute certainty.
Controlling something that is vastly more intelligent than humans is fundamentally difficult.
It seems to struggle to create music with a strong identity. It is great if you want to make a poor imitation of top 40 hits. But the thing about top 40 type music is that the best music is already in the Top 40. It remains to be seen if there is as strong a demand for a music chart filled with slop as there is demand for a music chart filled with pop tunes by celebrities. I don't think audio files are the right outp…
Some of the artists of the top 40 use some form of auto-tune to generate pleasing music. Can that be considered a slop-y?
Some? All of them use pitch correction and timing correction. And that's just what we do to the vocals!
> nothing can replace live music played by humans, as the experience and the very real positive benifits of an audience comming together can not be digitised I wish it were true but I'm also very aware of how many people I see in audiences today are scrolling instagram while the band plays. > There are hundreds of thousands of full time touring musical groups world wide, and millions of music festivals every year. Th…
8 billion people, maybe 9 billion...200000 bands that gives one band for every 42500 people..... 23 bands in a city of a million was a pure guess, but low right
But most bands aren't touring, right? Where does a million+ festivals come from?
The entire point of art is about human experience. If we’re really going to automate humans out of art (I don’t believe we will), and you really just want to look at some AI pictures that you like, why stop there? Why don’t we just go straight to the brain stem and have AI-administered doses of dopamine?
That's not the entire point of art. There are many points of art: inspiration, expression, fun, interior design, exterior design, etc. AI can create art that covers all of the above, except maybe expression.
Interior and exterior design are applications of art/design, not reasons. The other three things are human experiences. I’m not saying a human cannot create art using gen AI. In fact, whoever thought of making Gemini generate a “17th century British monarch eating watermelon” created a piece of art as provocative commentary on gen AI itself. But if we remove the artists and just have machines churning out materials to consume, maybe based on some signal of consumer preferences, I do not believe that is art. What fun, inspiration, or expression would be enjoyed by either creator or consumer?
Who is "we"? The entire human race? Expecting all humans across different cultures and languages to come together and figure out basic income for 9 billion people is absurd. This kind of cooperation never happened and probably never will. People are completely unable to cooperate at the massive scale this requires, let alone solve far smaller challenges like mitigating outbreaks or making an effort to avert climate c…
We as in, it's not a social cooperation thing, many people's individual moral ethics make it so they themselves would be uncomfortable with the idea of not working to earn a living. Currently, society as a whole generally believes that it's each individual person's prerogative to find paying work and most people don't really examine this belief. There's nothing to cooperate on yet.
I think the idea of a society where work is optional and people having their needs met by the society they live in is actually well explored. It's a Utopia. The problem is human nature is competitive and just being provided with everything you need to live, even being given ample time to create art and enjoy life, is not enough for many people. Utopian ideas all look great on paper but when meeting reality you cannot build Utopia around greed and elitism and you can't abolish them either.
It definitely is (and I would encourage that even). But such resistance cannot be luddite if it actually wants to win. Therefore, its goal cannot be "no AI", but rather "AI used for the benefit of society".
With ASI there is no way that we can control it with absolute certainty. Controlling something that is vastly more intelligent than humans is fundamentally difficult.
I'm not worried about controlling ASI acting on its own behalf.
What we need is to prevent humans in position of power from using the fledging AI that they control to entrench themselves and stomp on the rest of us.
With ASI there is no way that we can control it with absolute certainty. Controlling something that is vastly more intelligent than humans is fundamentally difficult.
I'm not worried about controlling ASI acting on its own behalf. What we need is to prevent humans in position of power from using the fledging AI that they control to entrench themselves and stomp on the rest of us.
ASI can not be reliably controlled by any humans.
It makes as much sense as chimpanzees or rats controlling humans.
The reason you don’t have more time for music is not technological, it’s social. We have enough technology to offer a basic life for everyone for free, but we have not agreed that doing so is worthwhile.
I think there’s an even bigger issue than this. Many people would not know how to live under such a system. By this, I mean that I strongly believe people would become severely depressed or insanely stir crazy. I’ve been on an extended sabbatical after 20 years in tech. The first year was magical. “I could do this forever” I told myself, and actually considered it. The second year was more complicated. I could feel m…
Just get a child and you have more than enough to do for roughly twenty years.
> If it was a rejection of anything, it was of any assumption of good faith on the part of either government or scientific institutions. Why that happened, as quickly and thoroughly and as polarized along clear partisan lines as it was, is a mystery. It isn't a mystery, it was the bullshit and lies that happened the first month of covid in USA, many people then stopped listening even when the bullshit and lies stoppe…
Except if you understand they were being misleading, and you understand why, you also understand Covid was a real problem and that there were serious infrastructure and logistics problems that had to be dealt with. You get angry with the government for fumbling the effort, but you still get vaccinated. That doesn't justify believing Fauci and Biden cooked up Covid in a lab or that the vaccines were spiked with microc…
You forgot the flip side of the predictions: that the vaccinated would end up bleeding out in the streets. I believe there were a large number of such predictions, which should have already happened.
I think this only strengthens your observation that anti-vaxxing went far beyond simple mistrust.
> The second year was more complicated. I could feel myself drifting away from myself. The structure of work and the rewards of working on big projects were now fully missing, and I could feel this growing emptiness that needed to be filled. If you don't mind sharing — why did you not choose to do a big project? I've always imagined that if I were lucky enough to have a sabbatical/retire early, it's not that I wouldn…
I’ve asked myself the same question, because before taking the break I also had visions of working on important/meaningful/undervalued things on my own terms. I think there were multiple factors. I hadn’t accounted for how much I relied on the work environment for social contact, and I didn’t have the social habits in place to maintain a healthy social life. This felt fine at first because I was also recovering from…
Completely understand that feeling, even with small things so get where your coming from. Thanks for sharing your experience.