3 ms·

We can enjoy it if there's more of us. Each class can have 5 teachers instead of one teacher on 30 kids. Government can create those jobs, take the hundred of t

We can enjoy it if there's more of us. Each class can have 5 teachers instead of one teacher on 30 kids. Government can create those jobs, take the hundred of trillions created and redistribute it. Marx was right I think capitalism eventually kills itself ...we won't need it anymore. Arguably we already don't need the aggressive version we have now but soon enough it will be clear we don't need any version of it. The means of production (AI, robots and land) will be transferred to the people who will all receive basic income, free services and (if they want) jobs created by the government for the greater good. I don't think its a dystopia.

xpe 4y ago
> Marx was right I think capitalism eventually kills itself ... I doubt very much that this is a testable theory. I think it is primarily a normative one.
xpe 4y ago
> The means of production (AI, robots and land) will be transferred to the people who will all receive basic income, free services and (if they want) jobs created by the government for the greater good. This is a prediction? Given human nature and the diversity of people (w.r.t. rationality, religiosity, morality, capability, and so on), it is very much an open question about (a) how AI capabilities will develop; (b) how they will be paid for... (c) and by whom; (d) to whom will benefits accrue; (e) how will society change. These are broad, sweeping questions. Plenty of fodder for imagination, hope, transformation, cynicism, backsliding, or even despair. If I were to make a bet, on our current trajectory, I see some key factors in tension: 1. educational quality, in absolute terms, increasing _and_ being more equitable 2. educational quality, in relative terms, continuing to be very unequal and probably getting more so. As one example, who has the resources to direct computationally intensive AI experiments? There are (and probably will be for a long time) gatekeepers for these resources. People that mix in this circles have a huge advantage. This makes me wonder if "exclusivity leads to inequality" is a saying from some philosopher.

xpe 4y ago

> Marx was right I think capitalism eventually kills itself ... I doubt very much that this is a testable theory. I think it is primarily a normative one.

xpe 4y ago

> The means of production (AI, robots and land) will be transferred to the people who will all receive basic income, free services and (if they want) jobs created by the government for the greater good. This is a prediction? Given human nature and the diversity of people (w.r.t. rationality, religiosity, morality, capability, and so on), it is very much an open question about (a) how AI capabilities will develop; (b) how they will be paid for... (c) and by whom; (d) to whom will benefits accrue; (e) how will society change. These are broad, sweeping questions. Plenty of fodder for imagination, hope, transformation, cynicism, backsliding, or even despair. If I were to make a bet, on our current trajectory, I see some key factors in tension: 1. educational quality, in absolute terms, increasing _and_ being more equitable 2. educational quality, in relative terms, continuing to be very unequal and probably getting more so. As one example, who has the resources to direct computationally intensive AI experiments? There are (and probably will be for a long time) gatekeepers for these resources. People that mix in this circles have a huge advantage. This makes me wonder if "exclusivity leads to inequality" is a saying from some philosopher.