2 ms·
> By replacing labour with robots and not compensating them, you're sending a clear message that you don't respect people and the value that they bring. The th
by atleastoptimal 3y ago
> By replacing labour with robots and not compensating them, you're sending a clear message that you don't respect people and the value that they bring.
The thing is we can't help but compare people on the value that they bring. We can't go on about human value being tied to our creativity, emotional sensitivity, or any skill because once AI can do that, that value goes out the window for humans. Humans have to be valuable for no other reason than the fact that they are human, even if they technically are a burden. This is the only mentality that will keep humans safe in the AI apocalypse.
- __MatrixMan__ 3y agoPerhaps it's time to stop using untyped value as a concept entirely. It has always been unclear--in cases where people's objectives differ--just whose values are used determine what counts as "value". It's a simplification that served us well when the common threat was famine or disease or war, but those threats weigh less on us these days. We're more concerned with mistreatment from each other, so we probably need something that answers "whose values?" instead so that we can be reminded to check if that person's agenda is actually worth persuing. Such a shift might help interrupt dangerous optimizations such as optimizing for GDP at the expense of biosphere stability.