Not everyone is cut out for the marriage.
You're clearly not ready for it, and that's OK. Just move on with your life and maybe you'll get there someday.
I had become a bit annoyed with Fermi when he suddenly offered to take wagers from his fellow scientists on whether or not the bomb would ignite the atmosphere, and if so, whether it would merely destroy New Mexico or destroy the world.
Seems a dumb bet, as if it had blown up the entire state or the world, nobody would be alive to pay up. Perhaps Fermi was just trolling.
By the way, we have similar decision coming up as to whether to bring Mars samples back to Earth. There's a non-zero chance they will have microbes we have no immunity for, and all parish. I realize we already have meteorites blasted off Mars, but they were heated both on the way up and down.
Marketers are used to that shit.
be big and controversial someday. They can't be banned because they can be arranged out of country.
AI, if it advances along the lines that have been laid out for it
There are only three groups of people who think AI will do this. Group 1 is the marketing arms of AI companies. Group 2 is snake oil CEOs who use AI talk to convince investors to part with their money. Group 3 is those who think the sky is falling.
But there are more groups who think that it could happen. Since you have a crystal ball and can predict the future you don't need to think about it.
It will *not* advance along the "lines that have been laid out for it."
So, you're saying we can't even ask the question, because you can predict the future.
Right.
So, if this is so absolutely certain, why are you still replying?
Ah yes, the "AI will take ALL jobs away from people" argument. So... tell me, exactly WHO is going to be buying these products the AI is going to be churning out if no one has a fucking job, and therefore no money is being circulated?
Exactly. That is the question. You nailed it:
How does our current economic model, which relies on the assumption that people must have jobs, operate when there are no jobs that an AI can't do at lower cost?
Jesus fucking christ, it's a self solving problem. All you have to do is think about it for half a second. It's literally IMPOSSIBLE under any form of capitalism,
So, you just predicted that the problem will solve itself when capitalism fails.
Fine. And then what?
Humans invent ever more ways to F up Earth.
David Ricardo's grave is now releasing methane.
True, you can always have leaks, but hydrogen leaks seem to be way, way more common than leaks of other fuels as a percentage of launch attempts. The shuttle was scrubbed on average almost once per launch, and a large percentage of the scrubs were caused by hydrogen leaks (source).
You're right; that link, and the Ars Technica one it references, is a pretty damning condemnation of hydrogen.
Soviet era cubicles are made of solid steel. Small, but can handle a nuclear blast.
It's a status symbol for the rich and spoiled, investment value means shit to them.
Sure, we can ask questions. But that's not the same as claiming that AI is about to end civilization as we know it.
You said it was a "logical fallacy" to even ask the question.
And your authority for making that pronouncement is? Many things that have never previously happened in human history have happened.
My authority is history. While AI has never happened before,
Bingo.
AI, if it advances along the lines that have been laid out for it, could very reasonably reach the point where it can replace humans in most jobs.
Maybe some hitherto-unsuspected new type of jobs will pop up that AI can't do. But we don't know that.
Even if AI and robotics can't do all jobs, if it replaces a high fraction of work without replacing that with other work that people will pay for, our current economic paradigm (as the grandparent post phrases it: "if you don't work, you don't eat") fail if there is no work available.
The switched us to Office/Outlook about a year ago.
Shit still doesn't work.
My only use of word is to format docs for the business types after I write them, so I don't really care about it. I mean, it is shitty, but whatever, I'm a Unix guy, I'm used to shitty UI.
What does bug me is Outlook. I get invites to meetings after they happen, mail gets randomly delayed for no apparent reason while I get other mail. And the UI does matter more there - they calendar will randomly refresh back to "today" when I'm trying to look at future things. The whole application randomly decides something is wrong and stops working until a restart.
And then there's the freakish "web" vs executable split.
Lots of Excel features don't work on the web, and apparently I use all of them. So after I share something and have to edit it again, I have to use this eunuch version that constantly tells me I'm doing it wrong.
Not too long from now I'll get the locked-down laptop from them, and not have any option to not use them. But that's fine, I expect to be laid off not long after that.
once AI becomes good enough that it can do every job cheaper than a human
This is a dystopian sci-fi fantasy that will never come to pass. There will always be jobs for humans.
And your authority for making that pronouncement is?
Many things that have never previously happened in human history have happened.
if, as you say, the truth is "if you don't work, you don't eat", what happens when there is no work to be had?
This is a logical fallacy. It's like asking, "What if we were to build an immovable object that could stand up to an irresistible force?" It's a contradiction.
You apparently don't know what a logical fallacy is. "In my opinion this won't happen" is not the definition of a logical fallacy.
You go on to say "don't even think about it even as a thought exercise."
There will *always* be work that machines can't do more cheaply than humans. All automation ever invented, has limits.
Man will never fly. It is a logical contradiction. This atomic bomb will never go off, and I speak as an expert on explosives. Everything that can be invented has already been invented. Humans will never fly to the moon; it is impossible. There is a world market for maybe computers.
It is able to cost-effectively replace only the most basic drudge-work.
And what we have now is the end of development; there will never be anything better.
Right now AI *feels* (potentially) omnipotent. This is just succumbing to the hypester's vaporous promises.
And therefore we can't even ask the question.
There is only one remedy for this problem which doesn't lead to wave after wave of this, and it is to separate the basic needs of the living from employment
In other words, there is no remedy for this "problem." Perhaps the "problem" isn't a bug, but a feature. Nobody is as interested in my personal lifestyle and comforts, than me. If a basic living isn't motivation enough for me to do whatever is necessary to obtain that basic living standard, why should someone else work harder so that I don't have to?
You are totally misunderstanding the problem.
Your implicit assumption here that it is possible for a person "to do whatever is necessary to obtain that basic living standard." But the question is: once AI becomes good enough that it can do every job cheaper than a human, how do humans survive?
You say "why should someone else work harder so that I don't have to?"-- but it's not another human that is working harder. It is a mechanism. And that mechanism is cheaper than you are.
And it's not that you don't "have" to. It's that work no longer exists for you to work at.
...
But these have not removed the basic foundation of truth that, if you don't work, you don't eat.
if, as you say, the truth is "if you don't work, you don't eat", what happens when there is no work to be had?
They are relatively good but absolutely terrible. -- Alan Kay, commenting on Apollos
