3 ms·

You don't know any of this. It was commonly thought that the planet would run out of food until the Wheatbelt was developed. The fundmental shift is changing

You don't know any of this. It was commonly thought that the planet would run out of food until the Wheatbelt was developed. The fundmental shift is changing the mindset. - Away from deriving economic tasks from logical goals developed over historical time. - Into and towards, Men guesstimating and taking risks in bold new directions for global innovation. The gloomerism is getting kind of boring and unrewarding tbh. We need better criticisms of the future, these "total-meaninglessness" jabs don't hold water.

vouaobrasil 3y ago
Are you serious? Of course, when we develop more ways of using resources, we can extend them. But we are already on the brink of climate disaster and we are nowhere near to colonizing other planets. Unless our population radically decreases, we will run out of resources. It's just mathematics: resources are finite. Also, I am not advocating TOTAL meaninglessness. I am advocating a new way of life that does not include AI, that's it. I never said everything is doomed. I think humans have a chance but that we should proceed WITHOUT AI. That's it.
- gremlinsinc 3y ago
  What if there was UBI, and everyone was guaranteed food, healthcare, education, and a home. Then they were basically encouraged to just follow their passions, whereever that takes them whether it's art, science, music, etc. Imagine that everyone who's in replaceable fields simply grew up to be scientists, and entertainers. Those were basically the only fields left to go into, and scientists are more like project managers directing AI towards finding solutions to specific goals, and making new discoveries, etc... We could fix a shit ton of issues with 70% of the population being scientists or science adjacent in their "careers" which that word is more like "life's work" or a hobby, than what it is today.
- barrysteve 3y ago
  Resources are finite so long as you stop developing new ones. Resources exist on the planet that are either too expensive in the current market to extract, or do too much damage to the local enviroment to get approvals. They are accessible when times get tougher. The electrification of the planet is massively reducing the costs to support life. We buy and sell flipped bits to each other and renew our car batteries from home solar. You could live like a monk, automated hydroponics, electric everything and probably not notice the majority of service collapsing except sewage and water. Water is a weird one because it's often not 'destroyed', just pumped around the ecosystem by natural forces or power plants and dirtied in the process. Developing cheaper water cycling methods could push costs even lower. The mathematics of finite resources depends heavily on who is doing the mathematics. The pre-wheatbelt guys couldnt guess what was going to happen next. AI is just a better tool. It has changed the relationship to work, like a car means we no longer ride horses. But we still use cars to do the same thing horses did. The categories have not changed as much as everyone is afraid of. Get out of trivial work, aka working in grammar, rhetoric and logic, and you'll probably feel a lot safer.

vouaobrasil 3y ago

Are you serious? Of course, when we develop more ways of using resources, we can extend them. But we are already on the brink of climate disaster and we are nowhere near to colonizing other planets. Unless our population radically decreases, we will run out of resources. It's just mathematics: resources are finite. Also, I am not advocating TOTAL meaninglessness. I am advocating a new way of life that does not include AI, that's it. I never said everything is doomed. I think humans have a chance but that we should proceed WITHOUT AI. That's it.

gremlinsinc 3y ago
What if there was UBI, and everyone was guaranteed food, healthcare, education, and a home. Then they were basically encouraged to just follow their passions, whereever that takes them whether it's art, science, music, etc. Imagine that everyone who's in replaceable fields simply grew up to be scientists, and entertainers. Those were basically the only fields left to go into, and scientists are more like project managers directing AI towards finding solutions to specific goals, and making new discoveries, etc... We could fix a shit ton of issues with 70% of the population being scientists or science adjacent in their "careers" which that word is more like "life's work" or a hobby, than what it is today.
barrysteve 3y ago
Resources are finite so long as you stop developing new ones. Resources exist on the planet that are either too expensive in the current market to extract, or do too much damage to the local enviroment to get approvals. They are accessible when times get tougher. The electrification of the planet is massively reducing the costs to support life. We buy and sell flipped bits to each other and renew our car batteries from home solar. You could live like a monk, automated hydroponics, electric everything and probably not notice the majority of service collapsing except sewage and water. Water is a weird one because it's often not 'destroyed', just pumped around the ecosystem by natural forces or power plants and dirtied in the process. Developing cheaper water cycling methods could push costs even lower. The mathematics of finite resources depends heavily on who is doing the mathematics. The pre-wheatbelt guys couldnt guess what was going to happen next. AI is just a better tool. It has changed the relationship to work, like a car means we no longer ride horses. But we still use cars to do the same thing horses did. The categories have not changed as much as everyone is afraid of. Get out of trivial work, aka working in grammar, rhetoric and logic, and you'll probably feel a lot safer.