4 ms·

We sometimes talk about "super-human" and "sub-human", but let's invert that and consider the idea of humans rated as "sub-computer" or "super-computer" instead

We sometimes talk about "super-human" and "sub-human", but let's invert that and consider the idea of humans rated as "sub-computer" or "super-computer" instead. Right now most of us are "sub-computer" when it comes to doing math or remembering millions or billions of bits of data, but still "super-computer" when it comes to "physical goods and services like homes, cars, restaurant meals, and haircuts". As computers (and robots) improve exponentially most of those areas where humans are commonly "super-computer" will contract, maybe all of them. Robots already build cars and cook hamburgers. If homes were built by robots we could make so many so cheaply that homelessness would disappear (except for a few people who like to be nomads.) As for haircuts, there are some hair artists for whom hair care and styling is an art. Other than that it's typically a marginal job that one does when you can't get a better job. I don't mean to disrespect haircutters! That's not where I'm coming from. Any job that can be done by machine should be done by machine. Humans should not have to "earn" a living in a world that contains transistors, magnets (for motors), and the Turing machine. We are done. We win. Now it's time to relax and lick our wounds and heal each other and ourselves. "Let the robots do the work and we'll take their pay." AI should cause mass unemployment and that should be a good thing!

JohnFen 4y ago
> AI should cause mass unemployment and that should be a good thing! But there's a wide gulf between "should" and "would". In order for that utopia to happen, we need to have an economic system that is 100% different from the one we have now, and there is no path to that level of transformation that doesn't require a period of large-scale human suffering. And large-scale human suffering means societal collapse that could very well derail any movement toward a different economic system. In the system we actually have, mass unemployment means a mass of people who have little to no income, and without income, they can't get the things they need to live.
- carapace 4y ago
  > there is no path to that level of transformation that doesn't require a period of large-scale human suffering Eh? I question that assumption.
  - JohnFen 4y ago
    I should have qualified that as "I don't see a plausible path..."
    - carapace 4y ago
      Fair enough. FWIW I'm working towards just such an economic shift right now. I just acquired some land for regenerative ag and a "living neighborhood"[1] Something like a cross between Village Homes[2] and Riverbed Ranch[3]. It's meant to be a nucleus or catalyst for us to jump-start a Star Trek-style future without waiting for anybody else. (If it works they can always join later, after we get more land...) [1] https://www.livingneighborhoods.org/ht-0/bln-exp.htm https://www.livingneighborhoods.org/ht-0/bln-exp.htm [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Homes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Homes [3] https://www.riverbed-ranch.com/ https://www.riverbed-ranch.com/
      - JohnFen 4y ago
        I applaud your efforts and consider such things to be important.

JohnFen 4y ago

> AI should cause mass unemployment and that should be a good thing! But there's a wide gulf between "should" and "would". In order for that utopia to happen, we need to have an economic system that is 100% different from the one we have now, and there is no path to that level of transformation that doesn't require a period of large-scale human suffering. And large-scale human suffering means societal collapse that could very well derail any movement toward a different economic system. In the system we actually have, mass unemployment means a mass of people who have little to no income, and without income, they can't get the things they need to live.

carapace 4y ago
> there is no path to that level of transformation that doesn't require a period of large-scale human suffering Eh? I question that assumption.
- JohnFen 4y ago
  I should have qualified that as "I don't see a plausible path..."
  - carapace 4y ago
    Fair enough. FWIW I'm working towards just such an economic shift right now. I just acquired some land for regenerative ag and a "living neighborhood"[1] Something like a cross between Village Homes[2] and Riverbed Ranch[3]. It's meant to be a nucleus or catalyst for us to jump-start a Star Trek-style future without waiting for anybody else. (If it works they can always join later, after we get more land...) [1] https://www.livingneighborhoods.org/ht-0/bln-exp.htm https://www.livingneighborhoods.org/ht-0/bln-exp.htm [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Homes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Homes [3] https://www.riverbed-ranch.com/ https://www.riverbed-ranch.com/
    - JohnFen 4y ago
      I applaud your efforts and consider such things to be important.