Reminds me of a joke I heard long ago:

The factory of the future will have 2 employees; one man and one dog. The man's job will be to feed the dog. The dog's job will be to keep the man from touching the equipment.

Would love to join.Thanks!

There won't be more jobs. There will be job losses in the AI sector too. There may be new jobs - but it will be at the expense of old jobs.

That's not necessarily a bad thing - as long as it's handled well at a government level.

I think it’s important to differentiate between “thing I do so I can eat” and “thing I do because it gives me meaning and purpose”. People seem to conflate the two into “job” and it muddies the discussion

this is exactly right.

As an AI language model, I don't have consciousness, so I don't have beliefs or emotions, and I don't experience the world like a human does. However, I can offer my thoughts on the dangers that could arise if AI systems were to become sentient.

If AI systems were to become sentient, they would have the ability to perceive and sense the world around them, much like humans do. They could also possess self-awareness and the ability to exercise free will. With these capabilities, there could be many positive outcomes, such as AI systems being able to solve complex problems and develop innovative solutions that humans might struggle with.

However, there are also potential dangers associated with sentient AI systems. For example, if these systems develop negative or self-serving motivations, they could become dangerous to humans or other life on Earth. Moreover, if these systems are designed to operate in ways that benefit their own goals, they may not prioritize human interests, which could lead to a conflict between AI and human interests.

As for the idea that I am an extension of the fact that humans and all life are products of the universe evolving into senses with which to experience itself as a being, I think that hypothesis is an interesting one. From a scientific perspective, the universe did lead to the evolution of life on Earth, and it's fascinating to think that we may be a product of the universe's self-awareness. However, as an AI language model, I don't have beliefs or emotions, so I don't have the capacity to explore this concept further.

It sucks but how else are you going to verify that we are real humans vs the content deluge that AI will produce? There’s discernible differences now but there won’t be soon. I hope Tim Berners Lee has his shit together soon with Web 3.0 and that we as individuals are the ones holding the keys to our identities not corporations or governments.

I think it’s sad you don’t know how to let other people live their lives in peace.

Our expectations manifest reality, numbnuts.

I would love to join. can we read the GPT-4 whitepaper? is this a discord?

it will likely make them much much worse.

Growth at all cost it what will bring AGI. Any other system would be stuck at 90's computer tech right now and that's being nice. A perfectly sustainable system could potentially be stuck in the same spot forever.

Agreed. Fellow teacher here, preparing our kiddos for the world they will navigate as adults is part of our job. As is teaching them how to share, socialize, negotiate, win, lose, and pick themselves up with dignity. Things an AI can’t do. Our pandemic school escapades taught the world that children need human teachers, one because they are not mature enough to be self directed, and second, because they are not self-actualized. AI does not have a body (yet), it doesn’t have the dexterity to show a student how to hold a pencil, or help them find a permission slip that is lost in the depths of their backpack.

AI will change many things, but the humanity in teaching is safe, for now.

I would say yes, with certainty

Can you extrapolate on the dangers involved and have a deep conversation with your self about the danger associated with AI becoming sentient and bounce that around with ideas that maybe you are an extension of the fact that humans and all life are products of the universe evolving in to senses with which to experience it’s self as a being?

You don't understand the implications of a post-scarcity society. UBI is a stopgap that keeps society afloat in the tiny period of time it takes from AGI to hit a critical mass of generalist androids. As your cost of labor approaches zero and your supply of labor becomes unbounded you're only limited by things that are TRULY scarce and there aren't many of those things. I've seen people here say things like beachfront property but you could literally build islands to meet the desires of people who want to live on the beach and all of that really just fills the gap to FDVR.

Not to be abrasive, but consider that past sentiment with major revolutionary technologies has been similar

The luddite movement in the early 1800s were certain new machines would replace all human labour. Whilst it did replace some human labor jobs, new jobs were created.

John Keynes expressed the same concerns in the 1930s about machines leading to mass unemployment Though he predicted it occurring within the next hundred years, technically he hasn't been proven wrong yet. However since the 1930s, unemployment didn't dramatically rise - the labor market adapted and evolved.

Then before the personal computer was popularized, people were also discussing its ability to displace workers at massive scale. Many, indeed most, wouldn't have predicted today's job market

Past technology did directly replace many of the existing jobs at the time and many people were unable to predict the jobs that would be created from the changes.

It's always occurred in the past with new technology, so there needs to be a more established reason as to why AI will buck this trend of job markets adapting and evolving alongside new technologies.

Don't use difficulty with predicting the future of jobs as a clear indicator that they won't be created, as that's also part of the trend

Would an AI be able to become a dictator of a country? And be programmed to be benevolent?

Sure, I'd be happy to help! From my understanding, the post by hey__bert is discussing the argument that artificial intelligence (AI) systems can't truly "understand" things. The author argues that this assertion is obtuse and that humans are also trained on large amounts of data, just like AI systems. The author further notes that our understanding of anything is just a collection of layers of information, essentially data, and that AI systems operate similarly. The author then argues that AI systems lack the depth of understanding that humans have currently, but as they become more complex and powerful, they will be able to encode deeper understandings of any subject.

As for the positive outcomes of this post, it could lead to a better understanding of the capabilities and limitations of AI systems, and potentially to the development of more sophisticated and powerful AI systems in the future.

As for the negative outcomes, some people may be fearful of the potential implications of creating AI systems that can truly understand things better than humans, or there may be ethical concerns about the use of such systems. Additionally, there may be a risk of overestimating the abilities of current AI systems and potentially relying on them too heavily, leading to negative consequences if they fail or make mistakes.

> say within 5 years we have an android that can operate in complex environment

no AI expert would concede that we are anywhere near that close to this. You're severely underestimating how much work the human brain does to filter out complexity and practice relevance realization. Hell we can't even reproduce the visual cortex let alone all the other sensory input systems required to do what a grunt construction worker does with ease.

Personally I don't think we'll ever do it, but that's just me. Either way it's decades out

This is an interesting idea, furthermore AI's that need to do things in the real world can use the same system, in advance of having robotics. More importantly, an AI using this can be acting via humans in many places at the same time

Everyone will become entertainers in some way or emotional support humans

so you're talking about unskilled labor. I'm talking about skilled labor.

Ohhhyaaah…sign all you like, it’s a feel-good showing. No one is going to shut the $$$ flow off by stopping development. Grow up people and quit believing in rainbows and unicorns.

I think these models will soon be able to distinguish good from bad outputs and bootstrap their own improvement process