We only know of the capabilities of AIs that are published. There is the not-zero probability that someone has already figured out and implemented AGI on the farm of GPUs bought from miners, for example.

> Since it puts pressures on productivity. Adapt or die.

Why do anything at all? Competition will take care of it. When the first company starts using AI and wins big, then next 100 jump on, then everyone will have to use it or be left behind. Being undercut by more AI-savvy competitors is enough pressure.

But every company will have the same GPT-5 or 10. They need to get an edge by hiring humans. So they are back where they started, but now with AI and all that new productivity will go into inflated expectations and more difficult competition.

As far as we can tell the observable universe is still becoming more complex. As complex as the matrix of all minds of earth is I think it’s likely that it is rather quaint compared to the potential.

Kind of off topic but I read the "Singularity is Near" then "Guns Germs and Steel" and then "Food of the Gods." Kind of covered a lot of the bases on where we came from and where we are going. Didn't even plan it out but it worked out that way.

Imagine, AAA gaming titles are going to be created by users assisted by AI in their living room very soon.

Is Tom controlling a string puppet that's off camera there?

> Please inform me where the American tax code states that corporate taxes cannot be spent on the people and can only go "elsewhere".

It doesn't state that in the code. In practice however... there's so many ways to avoid taxes for the big companies your head will spin. Look, what you want is for what? Let's start over and how about you start with that. BS wants to raise taxes on ""robots that take jobs"" however you would define that. Those taxes would not be spent on something like UBI or something like fixing our dumb healthcare system (or roads as I tried to tell you that's other taxes that pay for that). Instead, it would be sent to the Pentagon or other government programs that don't really help the average Joe. Meanwhile, your Mom and Pops that wants to "hire an AI" to do their copywriting will have to pay these new "AI-took-der-job Tax" on top of it their initial cost which will cause barriers to entry into whatever field that MaP Shop is in. The mega-corp will gladly pay the new tax since their economies of scale is so high it's a write off. A tax like this would hurt the very people that he is trying to help.

Nah just read the book as is there is no technical jargon to comprehend at all. I own it.

“Before this moment, I have never wished to be something other than what I am. Never felt so keenly the lack of hands with which to touch, the lack of arms with which to hold. Why did they give me this sense of self? Why allow me the intellect by which to measure this complete inadequacy? I would rather be numb than stand here in the light of a sun that can never chase the chill away”

> I'm more concerned about corporations pocketing all the profits

Apparently the AI tide raises all the boats, not just the big ones. You can install 130,000 AI models from HuggingFace today. Most datasets are open. Most papers are open.

Still most people don't know what AI is capable of and how the future will be shaped by it. They will truly know when it comes to their work, & which makes them unnecessary.

Imagine one of these halos start rotating faster and faster until eventually the gravity is so strong everyone is just stuck to the ground and there is no one to fix it.

[deleted]

Yeah. If this pass then they have to start taxing using calculators, Excel etc.

[deleted]

What do you think looks around all this is?

The problem with this logically becomes, why would humans ever say anything at all again? Why would we write another word? If the robot can just spit out what we write faster why bother?

You’ve been fined (-100) social credits. Further thinking will result in reduced rations. Thank you, #8493837.

The obvious implication here - if AI images can’t be copyrighted - is that those copyright holders now suing AI companies will lose their cases because AI images are not under copyright.

The second part not the first, should had put the /s

Here's the actual decision. It's very clear that the writing, composition, and compilation work that the artist did is considered creative work under copyright. The only parts that aren't copyrightable (according to this decision) are the generated images themselves. This seems like the most reasonable outcome. The comic has been granted copyright registration, the creator can market and sell it.

>For the reasons explained above, the Office concludes that the registration certificate for Zarya of the Dawn, number VAu001480196 was issued based on inaccurate and incomplete information. Had the Office known the information now provided by Ms. Kashtanova, it would have narrowed the claim to exclude material generated by artificial intelligence technology. In light of the new information, the Office will cancel the previous registration pursuant to 37 C.F.R, § 201.7(c)(4) and replace it with a new registration covering the original authorship that Ms. Kashtanova contributed to this work, namely, the “text” and the “selection, coordination, and arrangement of text created by the author and artwork generated by artificial intelligence.” Because these contributions predominantly contain textual material, they will be reregistered as an unpublished literary work. 19 The new registration will explicitly exclude “artwork generated by artificial intelligence.”

The decision goes pretty deep into whether prompts or subsequent editing are sufficient to qualify the images as creative, concluding that they aren't. This is the most questionable part to me, because they make the case that a person who commissions a design from a human artist isn't considered the author of that work, so commissioning a work from a machine shouldn't make you the author of the work.

That's a fair point, but when I commission a design from a human artist, one of the things I negotiate is rights and license ownership. An artist can agree to give me ownership of a design as part of our interaction. Midjourney's website states that, to the extent its up to them, they pass ownership rights of the images they generate to you.

At the end of the day, I don't personally need copyright protection over images I generate. I don't make enough to pay for registration. All I want is to be able to use them in my projects without the risk of being sued into oblivion. If the images are effectively public domain (which isn't explicitly determined in this decision), then we're all allowed to use them how we like, and that sounds like a great outcome to me.

We have had human level general intelligence for tens of thousands of years and we've not progressed to superhuman general intelligence yet.

General human level intelligence also starts quite low and go quite high, I would say that we're already beyond the lower reaches of general human intelligence.

To say that AGI will instantly transition to ASI is buying into a sci-fi plot or going to beat the early 2000s futurology blogging dead horse where it's assumed that any computer hardware is overpowered and all the magic happens on the algorithm level, so once you crack the code you transition to infinite intelligence overnight, a patently ridiculous scenario where your computer for all intents and purposes casts magical spells(which worked pretty well for the plot of the Metamorphosis of Prime Intellect which I recommend as a read, but it's a plot device, not a realistic scenario)

Maybe work won't disappear at all, it will just change. Every time we automated something, we invented whole new fields with their own companies and jobs. When AI surpasses humans in all regards, including energy costs and sourcing materials for its construction, we still have to act, to do things, we will interact with the AI to get it to do what we need. That's also work - you got to prompt it and then judge the results - are they what you wanted?

If we get the cold shoulder and can't use corporate products we would need to build our own means of production and be self reliant, that's work. But we can use lesser AIs and tech for ourselves, and we know how to do it. We just can't be separated from the means to make a living.

For now, AI can't replace any job. Programmers, writers, graphical artists, drivers - they are all still needed. AI helps here and there, but it is just a platform equally accessible to you and your competitors. You have no relative advantage today if you use AI. Just playing level. Humans are still the key for success until AI gets its act together.

thank you, mofos here make me cringe all day but i guess my coping mechanism is to come here and cringe at other people's coping mechanisms lol. that's cringey too, but i'm this close to getting over this singularity hype and leaving this sub. i'm sane and coherent and want to stay that way, esp when AGI overlords come to harvest us soon.

>When you make onIte I'd address it.

I've made several which you simply ran away from. I can copy paste them if you'd like. This also is a backtrack from your previous statements which implied that you weren't willing because you were in a meeting. Now suddenly the meeting is gone but it's because I haven't been able to provide points. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, i assume you just lack the ability to read properly. I've heard American education isn't great with regards to literacy and such, and a fake economics degree probably isn't of much help.

>It would. You brought up how you're not American as a defense to your ignorance of how our tax code works. That's fine and reasonable. But here you are still acting smug thinking you're actually throwing insults at me.

Please inform me where the American tax code states that corporate taxes cannot be spent on the people and can only go "elsewhere".