621–630 of 1001 posts
Poor countries will most likely follow suit, but it will take a while.
The end result, hopefully, will be a world where AI is a true benefit for the world population, but it will require a change in mindset.
Funny thing - I've been using ChatGPT as a programming assistant. My experience with it is that the more knowledgeable I am at the domain, the more useful it is. It often generates code that won't compile or won't run correctly, but that sort of goes in the correct direction, enough that I can spot the blunders and refine my questions. Quite often I even learn a few new things when using it to explore libraries and f…
It's not bad for something that's pretty new. Now imagine what another decade or two of development will give us. The number of areas in which a typical worker is more knowledgeable is going to get lower and lower.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I mean I think that's with every system a problem. Not just ours. This doesn't mean that different economic systems have equivalent or comparable problems. Just like you can have a worse economic system than today's global capitalism, you could, in principle, have better systems.
Capitalism is not an economic system, it is a description of fundamental economics. Countries can have a highly regulated form of capitalism where trade and ownership is strictly controlled… and they’re often called socialist or communist, or a laissez faire system. However, so long as people are using land, buildings structures, designing equipment… the laws of capitalism will apply.
We can use other systems that suit our goals better. Even if it’s a better form of capitalism than what we’re dealing with now.
This post-monetarist form of capitalism is killing people and this planet and enriching but a few. That’s not the kind of society most people want. A matter of time before there are enough have-nots and upheaval becomes a real problem for the capital owners.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I your work is not producing anything valuable for other people it's void and you will get bored pretty fast, it's a human nature. If it does you can always find a way to monetize it as people need it and ready to share their wealth for something they need. No, it doesn't have to be a work "for a company", but if you can't "make money off of this" it probably means your "work" is only relevant to you, or somebody els…
People who have enough wealth to not work for a living seem to manage their boredom pretty well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The grandparent comment does contain a definition: “A […] system that […] would make people welcome better AI because they could be confident it would make everyone wealthier” That would be a fair system regardless of the specifics of how it’s achieved.
Well, then we have been living in a system that's as close to fair as possible since global individual wealth has been growing for a long time. The few times we had it shrink significantly over some period of time is when local populations attempted forced wealth distribution. Our present system, by this definition, is amazing!
That’s a non-sequitur.
The fact that so many people fear loss of income as a result of better AI is a real indictment of our economic system. A better system that more fairly distributed economic productivity would make people welcome better AI because they could be confident it would make everyone wealthier instead of just a few people rich enough to be Goa'uld.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we could just stop being economically gaslighted it would help. The economic system can't be simultaneously unproductive enough to require us to keep raising the retirement age and so productive that job loss is a big problem. It is possible that a political war on labor is being waged at both ends.
The changing demographics is what causes the retirement age to be increased. In the 1960's, the average lifespan was in the 60s. So a retirement age of 65 meant that around half of retirees would die before collecting retirement. Now the average lifespan is 80. And the median age of the population is older than ever. Not really much to do with an "unproductive" population. Except that retirees are unproductive I gues…
Congratulations, you have failed statistics.
This is a really pessimistic and shallow article. Who will prompt the AI for code? Manager? Also, you mentioned it gave wrong result at first. How did you know? Because you know how to code. As mentioned in other comment she should learn more about programming so she can become indispensible.
The fact that so many people fear loss of income as a result of better AI is a real indictment of our economic system. A better system that more fairly distributed economic productivity would make people welcome better AI because they could be confident it would make everyone wealthier instead of just a few people rich enough to be Goa'uld.