i talked to an acquaintance of mine today whos a programmer and she said she doesnt think AGI is coming soon. she thinks giant corporations wont make proper progress toward AGI becuz theyre just in it for money. she said “the first ai i ever programmed was a chatbot. chatbots easily convince humans to believe theyre sentient cuz of socioevolutionary reasons. theyre not actually sentient just becuz we think they are”

i hope shes wrong but….. she is smarter than me 🤷🏻‍♀️

Laws are also just as varied by culture. Gun control for a very clear example. Not by individual that's for sure.

I do cannot wait for an AI to be the judge and jury and lawmaker, unbiased by beliefs and ideologies.

My point is that if you have easy access to something (time included), then you wouldn't pay someone else to do it unless there was value doing so. I can also drive my own car, pick up my own food, & so on, but there is value in saving time, which is the only thing I can see as valuable for op to do because interacting with the ai also takes some skill for better results.

1. I would give it closer to 15-20 years. Congress won’t act until it’s turns into a widespread disaster.
2. UBI, if it happens, will be a stripped down version of current welfare systems. It won’t be free money.

That's because ethics vary widely by culture and the individual. Laws are more focused.

"In addition, visual representations, such as drawings, cartoons, or paintings that appear to depict minors engaged in sexual activity and are obscene are also illegal under federal law." So, I think it should apply to AI generations as well.

I also am not sure what to think about how people tend to agree or disagree on legalities. I remember when, in non-AI related discourses, not sure which ones but it was pretty recent, there was backlash about "X" thing being legal. And a lot of redditors jumped in to say that "Legal does not equal ethical".

Now the same discourse is being used for many things AI: "It's not ethical, but it's legal so it's fine."

The faster things go now, the more likely it is to be a slow takeoff scenario. AI models, though they are getting increasingly close to matching human performance on general tasks, are still very far from matching human parameter count in any efficiency scale close to the human brain. This will be a requirement before general ASI can bring about an intelligence explosion, which I still don't see happening before 2040. Meanwhile I believe we are in the midst of a slow takeoff now that will usher in enormous societal change with proto-agi and agi and agi systems.

The exploitation of children in any form, including through AI-generated imagery, is illegal and morally reprehensible - because it is illegal even when illustrated. Creating or distributing material that sexually exploits children, whether it's real or simulated, contributes to a harmful and dangerous environment for children. Instead, a society focused on improving exponentially should focus on more rational ways to solve what seems to be an actual epidemy of paraphilia that is now being wavered around as an actual sexual orientation.

Also, the argument that "if no harm is brought to any children, what objection is there to this sort of material?" overlooks the fact that even the mere creation and distribution of such material perpetuates a culture that dehumanizes and commodifies children. This can have a damaging effect on children's wellbeing, as well as on society as a whole. This has happened with the normalization of certain sexual media already.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU5qEW-9MZk

https://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF12D43.pdf

Pornography already causes negative behavioural patterns on people. AI imagery is already thrilling and exciting for many - even addictive. When it starts to become better, and more accesible and easier to customize - the access to that content will be highly more widespread inevitably.

What action does it warrant? That, I am not sure. But I am also not sure that the majority of people seek "unhinged unfiltered AI" for noble purposes towards a better society (And we're supposed to look forwards to AI that benefits humanity. A better society is part of that.)

how is it fear mongering, is it not reality?

I'm not saying society is collapsing, but one should adapt to the future. If that's fear mongering than I'm sorry.

[deleted]

Some people around or my age group (late-teens to mid-20's) already think about adaptation in such new reality.

> This is basically art generation with restricted scope.

Its creating Figma files too. It can probably replace some entry level UX designers soon. 4 years from now, who knows.

Good bye UI jobs.

Super dope. Made a video on this. I am really excited to try this out. As a UI designer - I love it. It lowers the barrier of entry for people to build their own products and companies.

> unemployment rate is at a historic low right now

A big percentage of that are shit jobs, without a living wage, with little to no benefits, and people trying to string together gig economy jobs to keep from starving.

I work in a sector historically known for for its slow to adapt approach and old school ways. They are scrambling to implement everything they can yesterday.

Sure, I’m extrapolating and using my knowledge of economics, business, AI, human psychology, etc. It’s a hypothesis based on the universe of facts that I believe relevant. It’s not an assumption out of thin air. It’s possible I’m wrong I will grant that.

However, I was taking issue with a post that seemed to think it was highly unlikely that UBI would be necessary in 2-3 years and the reasoning presented for that conclusion. I think it is certainly within a reasonable degree of probability that many jobs will in fact be displaced faster than others being created elsewhere and that could occur in 2-3 years.

You could also grow your own vegetables but you probably don’t.

You’re making a huge assumption that these technologies will result in unemployment with no actual evidence. It could just as easily turn out that instead of using current “manual” framework stacks to build apps, SWEs adapt to use an AI stack and just build more apps better and faster.

I’m all for UBI if it turns out it’s actually needed because we ended up creating cornucopia machines. But while unemployment is single digits its pretty silly to call for it.

I'm hedging my bets by learning to deal drugs

https://youtu.be/HUU3HdxOqZs

We will see. Let’s meet back here in a year and see where things are.

Learn to code weld

>I would be very surprised if large segments of the workforce were not displaced by AI by 2025.

If I had to hazard a guess, most AI researchers and economists would very much disagree with this take.

And I think you're underestimating the complexity of those jobs.

My experience had been worse with Bing, try searching for some anime/manga pirated content.

Your response to UBI is necessary in 2-3 years is to say look at the current employment rate? This doesn’t address at all that we are in the slope of the exponential curve now. Just look how fast GPT is being incorporated into MSFT. Even if you assume that process started with GPT-3 in 2020 we are basically 2-3 years out from that. These advances are only accelerating and being adopted at an ever increasing pace. I would be very surprised if large segments of the workforce were not displaced by AI by 2025.

This forum generates a lot of this discussion because it has attracted people who have thought a lot about this topic and see where it’s headed and how quickly.