Tend to agree. A career is about finding a path through life that suits you which also brings in money. You move from place to place, ideally avoiding things you hate and finding what fulfilment you can.

Life will truly change for the better when people full dive into "Welcome to Pia Carrot".

[deleted]

>we will always do art, its baked into our species.

We will always do what we need to improve our lives, with or without help. It's baked into our species. Amazing lack of confidence in our ability to invent new kinds of work with AI! Or maybe lack of imagination about what these future jobs might be. Or just fear of the unknown.

The unsupervised use case of ChatGPT is very limited.

>Altman told policymakers that OpenAI is on the path to creating “artificial general intelligence,”

There is no way to really know that from existing products.

>In the meetings, Altman told policymakers that OpenAI is on the path to creating “artificial general intelligence,”

If they get there, it won't be as a private company.

Why do I think this? Personally, I believe it's painfully obvious that once private AI organizations come anywhere near something resembling AGI, they'll get taken over/nationalized by their respective national governments/armed forces. OpenAI won't be an exception.

There is absolutely no reason why the US government/military would just sit there and watch a tiny group of private citizens create something that dwarves the power of nuclear weapons.

And no, I doubt the average US senator is up to date with what is happening in AI, but I'm almost positive that there are people in the government/military who are keeping a close eye on progress in this field, and I have no doubt that the gov/military will pounce when the time is right (assuming that time ever arrives).

Ballsy of Altman to tell lawmakers to their faces that they're on the path to creating something that would potentially eclipse their own power. But like I said, I highly, highly doubt that that will ever be the case.

Come on, the role of "web developer" has been automated away years ago.

I think there will be 'overhang'. AI is developed into AGI. AGI is able to control lesser forms of biology at will. (custom plants, custom small animals, immortal pets).

And then gradually the performance gets so good that the FDA and other bottlenecks are bypassed once it simply can't be denied how good the results are. Hundreds of millions of people will die who could have been saved, just like the FDA slow walking moderna cost millions of lives.

Try not to be among them.

>Ca akg preliminary data appears to show it reverses epigenetic age by years, and epigenetic changes appear to be the cause of aging. Resveratrol basically halts age related changes in gene expression in the heart, keeping it young indefinitely.

OK this is good, I didn't know that

>Sinclair is bringing blindness treatment to clinical trials within 1 or 2 years iirc.

Good, but unfortunately many promising blindness treatments fail in human trials. I hope it works obviously but I'm just warning you it might not

>Alzheimer progress was halted by melatonin in one case study in another it also halted parkinsons.

That's great, but again, many promising treatments fail later on.

>Regrowth of teeth is already in animal trials.

Regrowing teeth has been in clinical trials for decades

>As for organs it is likely we can use embryonic development for that and do humanized chimeras in pigs, the research is already quite advanced.

True, and from what I remember we are already using pig hearts as a scaffold, growing a patients own cells onto it to avoid rejection, and putting it into a patient.

>Cancer within years a company doing transfusions from cancer immune humans to normal humans will bring a product to market. There are also nanoparticle sponges from another company that appears highly effective.

Hopefully this works. In future we could work out how to make someone immune to cancer via gene editing etc

>True nanobots are likely to be the result of advanced synthetic biology using unevolvable designs. Recently ai has allowed for zinc finger design which will enable the edition of the genome at arbitrary points greatly accelerating progress. Also ai has beem able to predict many existing proteins and design novel ones with novel functions iirc just exactly what we need for nanobots.

I'm not saying nanobots will never happen, but we've been working on them for decades with little progress made.

Progress in genome editing is good but please try to remember that this is still in its infancy

Yh ai is helping a lot, they already designed a potential treatment / cure for a currently incurable and untreatable lung condition

What did you do to get this answer from ChatGPT?After copying and pasting the text of the article, you asked ChatGPT to extract the article summary?

the next 10 years will be beyond your wildest dreams. Biotech revolution will happen, just like the internet or computing revolution before it.

Hopefully as the models keep getting the anti-AI crowd will just fade into the background since everyone else will just be enjoying all the cool new tools and using the capability to enhance their work or just for fun, etc

It's very advantageous for Sam to sell (oversell?) the achievements of OpenAI. He gets to collaborate and help define the future regulation which binds his industry - making it harder for competitors to enter in the future. And it's a great opportunity to build connections for future government contracts, which AI will certainly be a part of.

I partly agree with you. I think we do need to augment/change our psychophysiology as you say and I think we are already doing this. We have done this through culture, psychotechnology, drugs , etc and all these things aim to change how humans operate in the world to improve the self and society. These things cannot exist without technology and society and their true purpose is to self replicate and create better technology which will lead to a singularity and so on.
Although we are a blip in this evolution tree of 'technology' I do think we can improve our condition in this local space which is part of the larger evolutional space.
Maximizing empathy could be a way but forms of this have been tried through ideas such as effective altruism etc. Maximizing self centeredness or empathy will never work in my opinion because the universe is composed of "collaborative" systems where each agent in this system works locally to optimize some global objectives. Since these systems must cooperate and any agent that utilizes a = strategy that is too selfish or too altruistic will lose because other evolution will inevitably spawn a better strategy to that can exploit it. See the iterated prisoner's dilemma and how tit for tat is a good solution to it.
Human societies have always used technologies to modify the psychology of its constituents and evidence of this is all around us. An interesting technology that has now fallen out of interest in popular culture is propaganda. See the work of Jacques Ellul "Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes" where Ellul argues that technological society cannot exist without propaganda is propaganda is what allows humans to deal with the new issues technical society bares on them.

Oh shits about to get real

i understand your logic but its a little flawed.

your assuming that in the next 1,000,000 years that humanity wont ever develop a smart enough intelligence to figure out a way to avoid the heat death of the universe,

considering how we are already seeing significant improvements in our ability to literally manipulate matter on a quantum level whos to say that once we figure out how black holes truly work and how they relate to dark energy or dark matter that we wont be able to take advantage of those systems to manipulate the entirety of the universe to eventually avoid the heat death of the universe.

im not saying its guaranteed to happen but knowing that it could potentially happen directly contradicts your logic that out inability to have control over our fate is equal to what our ability to do so would be 1,000,000 years from now. and that logical inconsistency validate peoples anxiety towards the thought of missing out on those intellectual transcendent/enlightening experiences.

They do pay a living wage.

Thing is, a living wage in the US might be 45.000$ as opposed to 8.000$ somewhere else.

You'll be in great shape, though I wouldn't cling too tightly to the role of a web developer. There will be a lot of work for developers and technology people of all stripes.

One thing I keep highlighting are the places that need people to help build AI and push it forward, and that's not just in the hard algorithmic side. We're going to need to soothe itches in lots of places where these things can't scratch for years to come.

[deleted]

I guess I view it a little like my experience will end no matter what. After that (can’t know for sure though) I will cease to exist.

It’s a little pointless to be anxious and not accepting of it because at the end of it, it’s not your decision when your number gets called or whether this tech gets developed before your death.

It comes today or in 1 million years, you have equal control in both circumstances. I think it’s okay to want to be around for it but I also think you should be accepting that’s there’s a good chance we won’t. To not accept that means you’re unduly troubling your real current life.

I want a harem of cute girl maids in FDVR, is that too much to ask for

Who's calling GPT3 AGI?

This was something I've been thinking about. We have Soooo much data out there, but it's largely unaccessible and disconnected. Might have the tools to cure countless diseases but haven't, simply due to inefficient information spread.

You'll be fine.

AI is not going to be able to really replace programmers for a long time, and the people saying it will just don't have much experience with programming in the real world. It's going to take widespread AGI before programmers are obsolete, and it's hard to predict when that will happen, but it's not 2 years.

Learning a programming language is pretty easy, and AI can do that. The hard, time-consuming part is figuring out what specifically you want the computer to do in the first place. Once you do that, expressing it precisely in terms of a programming language is no more difficult (and often easier) than expressing it in natural language. The other huge part of the job is debugging or optimizing code, which requires some deep understanding of how the many pieces of a complex system work together. This is an enormous leap beyond the capabilities of the AI tech that is currently impressing everyone. It's not impossible for theoretical future AI, but it's not just an incremental improvement over models like GPT. It's a whole different kind of thing.

I expect AI to provide increasingly impressive autocomplete features to help make programmers more productive. That's still exciting stuff. It might reduce the market for programmers a little bit by making each one more productive, so people don't need to hire as many of them. But it won't replace them until we have true AGI that can actually reason and understand things.

To be clear, I'm not dissing what OpenAI is doing here. I'm excited for it. But people on this sub especially are badly misjudging some of its implications.

im no computer scientist, but ive always held the belief that humans need to augment their psychophysiology to the degree that eliminates things like greed and deceit while maximizing empathy.

this needs to happen before people every try to implement radically different forms of economic and governmental systems