4 ms·

We don't make specific time predictions because it's just not possible. But we can make relative predictions. However long it takes to get to AGI, when we're (s

by jph00 9y ago

We don't make specific time predictions because it's just not possible. But we can make relative predictions. However long it takes to get to AGI, when we're (say) half way there, the amount of societal upheaval will be enormous. If we can't navigate that successfully, we'll never get to see AGI...

jacquesm 9y ago
> when we're (say) half way there, the amount of societal upheaval will be enormous. I had a conversation with a C level exec of a large company last week around this theme. My suggestion that limited AI such as self driving cars has the potential to create a vast number of extremely frustrated individuals making a second round of 'Sabotage' and Luddites a definite possibility was waved away as if those people don't matter and don't have any power. I really wonder how far you'd have to be removed from the life of a truck or cab driver not to be able to empathize with them and to realize that if you take away some of the last low education jobs that allow you to keep your hands clean that there will be some kind of backlash. AGI will expand that feeling to all of us.
- stale2002 9y ago
  If self driving cars/trucks become a thing, and cause millions of people to be unemployed, there is ALSO a correspondingly massive economy increase. IE, the world is now massively richer because of all this awesome new technology. Yes, there could be some short term disruption, but honestly I think things will end up fine, just because of the massive amount of extra money and wealth that the world will have that could be used to solve all those short term problems that disruption causes.
  - jph00 9y ago
    That's not how things have generally worked out in the world. Billions live in abject poverty even although the world has plenty enough to feed them and provide shelter. The issue is income distribution - and just making more money doesn't magically fix the problem.
    - udkl 9y ago
      > just making more money doesn't magically fix the problem Magically, no. With an effort yes. There are already experiments with basic pay for example. Jeremy Rifkin books such as https://www.amazon.com/End-Work-Decline-Global-Post-Market/dp/0874778247/ https://www.amazon.com/End-Work-Decline-Global-Post-Market/d... & 'Zero Marginal Cost' discuss the topic.
      - jph00 9y ago
        Yes exactly. We really hope to see this effort made. It's a fixable problem, but often in history great inequality is only fixed by violent revolution, which I don't want to see happen in my (or my daughter's) time!
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    Chances are that the increased riches of the world will not be divided in such a way that those who are now earning a living wage with their driving license will profit from that.
  - ridgeguy 9y ago
    But it seems that increased economic benefits aren't shared. Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century, average adjusted worker wages in the US from ~1975 to present, etc. I'm concerned that 'some short term disruption' will actually be quite widespread and long-lasting, given increasing interdependencies.
  - pixl97 9y ago
    You seem to forget why the luddites were luddities in the first place. Yes, fabric was much cheaper, but in the meantime they were starving to death. The groups that make billions off this technology will lobby to keep more of their earnings so this vast wealth redistribution you want to happen, wont.
benjaminl 9y ago
> However long it takes to get to AGI, when we're (say) half way there, the amount of societal upheaval will be enormous. Could you unpack this a bit more? Are you referring to the disruption in jobs caused by the effectiveness of narrow AI when we reach that point?
- jph00 9y ago
  Yes exactly. Fewer people can add economic value at that point, and unless there is a negative income tax or basic guaranteed income, inequality spirals out of control, leading to even more of the anger-driven policy we're starting to see today.
dclowd9901 9y ago
We'll figure it out. Those who stand to benefit the most from AGI will want to keep their vast fortunes and lobby governments to figure out ways to keep the common man happy. Not to have every dream fulfilled, but just happy enough to not uprise. It's kinda always worked that way.

by jph00 9y ago

jacquesm 9y ago

> when we're (say) half way there, the amount of societal upheaval will be enormous. I had a conversation with a C level exec of a large company last week around this theme. My suggestion that limited AI such as self driving cars has the potential to create a vast number of extremely frustrated individuals making a second round of 'Sabotage' and Luddites a definite possibility was waved away as if those people don't matter and don't have any power. I really wonder how far you'd have to be removed from the life of a truck or cab driver not to be able to empathize with them and to realize that if you take away some of the last low education jobs that allow you to keep your hands clean that there will be some kind of backlash. AGI will expand that feeling to all of us.

stale2002 9y ago
If self driving cars/trucks become a thing, and cause millions of people to be unemployed, there is ALSO a correspondingly massive economy increase. IE, the world is now massively richer because of all this awesome new technology. Yes, there could be some short term disruption, but honestly I think things will end up fine, just because of the massive amount of extra money and wealth that the world will have that could be used to solve all those short term problems that disruption causes.
- jph00 9y ago
  That's not how things have generally worked out in the world. Billions live in abject poverty even although the world has plenty enough to feed them and provide shelter. The issue is income distribution - and just making more money doesn't magically fix the problem.
  - udkl 9y ago
    > just making more money doesn't magically fix the problem Magically, no. With an effort yes. There are already experiments with basic pay for example. Jeremy Rifkin books such as https://www.amazon.com/End-Work-Decline-Global-Post-Market/dp/0874778247/ https://www.amazon.com/End-Work-Decline-Global-Post-Market/d... & 'Zero Marginal Cost' discuss the topic.
    - jph00 9y ago
      Yes exactly. We really hope to see this effort made. It's a fixable problem, but often in history great inequality is only fixed by violent revolution, which I don't want to see happen in my (or my daughter's) time!
- jacquesm 9y ago
  Chances are that the increased riches of the world will not be divided in such a way that those who are now earning a living wage with their driving license will profit from that.
- ridgeguy 9y ago
  But it seems that increased economic benefits aren't shared. Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century, average adjusted worker wages in the US from ~1975 to present, etc. I'm concerned that 'some short term disruption' will actually be quite widespread and long-lasting, given increasing interdependencies.
- pixl97 9y ago
  You seem to forget why the luddites were luddities in the first place. Yes, fabric was much cheaper, but in the meantime they were starving to death. The groups that make billions off this technology will lobby to keep more of their earnings so this vast wealth redistribution you want to happen, wont.

benjaminl 9y ago

> However long it takes to get to AGI, when we're (say) half way there, the amount of societal upheaval will be enormous. Could you unpack this a bit more? Are you referring to the disruption in jobs caused by the effectiveness of narrow AI when we reach that point?

jph00 9y ago
Yes exactly. Fewer people can add economic value at that point, and unless there is a negative income tax or basic guaranteed income, inequality spirals out of control, leading to even more of the anger-driven policy we're starting to see today.

dclowd9901 9y ago

We'll figure it out. Those who stand to benefit the most from AGI will want to keep their vast fortunes and lobby governments to figure out ways to keep the common man happy. Not to have every dream fulfilled, but just happy enough to not uprise. It's kinda always worked that way.