53 ms·

Programmers here seem excited about the potential of this new version...but I can't help but wonder at how naive this attitude really is. Even if AI never becom

Programmers here seem excited about the potential of this new version...but I can't help but wonder at how naive this attitude really is. Even if AI never becomes intelligent like us, if it can emulate this intelligence in enough domains, then it has a serious chance of being dangerous. It's already pretty much guaranteed that it will put almost everyone out of a job, turning the vast majority of humans into content-consuming sloths. Does it really make sense to play with this kind of power?

ketzo 3y ago
It’s way too late to pretend AI won’t have an impact on programming as a profession. Better to be excited and learn the tool as it develops than to stick your head in the sand. A world where AI has put literally everyone “out of a job,” meanwhile, is still so far from our current reality that IMO, it’s not worth making practical day-to-day decisions on unless you are directly involved in the development or regulation of AI.
- vouaobrasil 3y ago
  That is exactly the prisoner's dilemma. Besides, I already quit being a programmer this year :)
  - ketzo 3y ago
    Hey, fair enough, more power to you then. Have fun touching some grass, friend!
- TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
  > meanwhile, is still so far from our current reality 2 years ago something like ChatGPT (as limited as it is) was “far from our current reality”. I think it’s worthwhile to think ahead.
  - ketzo 3y ago
    I understand your broader point, which is that progress in this space will be discontinuous and hard to see until it’s already happened. But two years ago, GPT-3 was already astounding. ChatGPT made some pretty huge gains, and GPT4 more still, but the thing that exists today was relatively predictable, compared to a world where human effort is no longer important.
jorgemf 3y ago
You are assuming that the whole existence of humanity is to work? because, without working, they would be sloths? What about expending more time having healthy habits like working out, meeting more often with family and friends, discovering the world, learning new stuff? So retired people are just sloths?
- TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
  I’m more worried about people not being able to feed themselves because their labor became worthless. They will effectively be frozen out of the economy as they have nothing to trade with.
  - someplaceguy 3y ago
    So you think that in a world of AGI, humans will have all our needs met by machines? Or do you think there will always be space for humans to provide value to other humans, even if machines surpass us in intelligence?
    - TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
      Frankly, I think eventually machines will do it all. I see AGI as the universal automation that can do everything a human can - apart from “being human”.
      - someplaceguy 3y ago
        Well, that's it, isn't it? Even if AI can do everything, you'd still want the authentic human experience. 99% of people are far smarter than horses but people still pay to ride horses. I don't see why someone wouldn't want to pay to... ride me... uh, in a matter of speaking, of course (of course). I mean, look at me.
        TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
        > 99% of people are far smarter than horses but people still pay to ride horses. How many working horses are there today vs before automobiles? Heck, how many domestic horses are there today vs before automobiles?
p1necone 3y ago
It bothers me a little bit as a programmer, but the rational part of my mind is aware that there's literally never been a major technological advancement in human history that didn't ultimately result in more people being employed, not less. Improvements in productivity just result in people realizing there's a whole new world of stuff they can now build that wasn't feasible before, and the market will eat that up. The shape of my career might change, but I doubt I'll be unable to find a job.
- jquery 3y ago
  Ask horses how they're doing these days... just because we've always found a use for humans because of their unique cognitive abilities doesn't mean we always will find a use. I think it's critical to be thinking about how to make sure wealth isn't simply funneled to a few capitalists who own everything simply by virtue of them being first, because it seems that's the future we're heading for if we aren't careful. I think you, and I, and everyone on HN will be fine (more or less...) but I am worried about a wide swath of people who will get "left behind."
  - someplaceguy 3y ago
    > Ask horses how they're doing these days... It would be pointless. Do you even know that 99% of horses can't speak English? Anyway, my own experience tells me they're mostly just horsing around. A lot more leisure and a lot less work than a few centuries ago... Good times!
    - CaptWillard 3y ago
      "The [horse] population peaked in 1910 at 27.5 million, more than 600% higher than in 1840. What does the overall growth of horses and mules during the nineteenth century suggest about the relationship between animal power and the introduction of new mechanical technologies, including the steam engine?" https://energyhistory.yale.edu/horse-and-mule-population-statistics/ https://energyhistory.yale.edu/horse-and-mule-population-sta...
Turing_Machine 3y ago
Analogous viewpoint in the Eighteenth Century: "90% of the human race consists of agricultural laborers, mostly unfree (slaves or serfs). Steam-powered machinery will put almost all of those people out of work, turning the vast majority of humans into food-consuming sloths". Somehow that didn't happen, though.
- an_aparallel 3y ago
  it didnt happen?? not sure if you missed the /s ??
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    It did happen, and... it was fine. Agriculture's share of the labor force went from something like 70% in the early 20th century to something like 5% now. You have a higher purpose than doing a robot's job badly -- or a farmer's. Find it.

ketzo 3y ago

It’s way too late to pretend AI won’t have an impact on programming as a profession. Better to be excited and learn the tool as it develops than to stick your head in the sand. A world where AI has put literally everyone “out of a job,” meanwhile, is still so far from our current reality that IMO, it’s not worth making practical day-to-day decisions on unless you are directly involved in the development or regulation of AI.

vouaobrasil 3y ago
That is exactly the prisoner's dilemma. Besides, I already quit being a programmer this year :)
- ketzo 3y ago
  Hey, fair enough, more power to you then. Have fun touching some grass, friend!
TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
> meanwhile, is still so far from our current reality 2 years ago something like ChatGPT (as limited as it is) was “far from our current reality”. I think it’s worthwhile to think ahead.
- ketzo 3y ago
  I understand your broader point, which is that progress in this space will be discontinuous and hard to see until it’s already happened. But two years ago, GPT-3 was already astounding. ChatGPT made some pretty huge gains, and GPT4 more still, but the thing that exists today was relatively predictable, compared to a world where human effort is no longer important.

jorgemf 3y ago

You are assuming that the whole existence of humanity is to work? because, without working, they would be sloths? What about expending more time having healthy habits like working out, meeting more often with family and friends, discovering the world, learning new stuff? So retired people are just sloths?

TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
I’m more worried about people not being able to feed themselves because their labor became worthless. They will effectively be frozen out of the economy as they have nothing to trade with.
- someplaceguy 3y ago
  So you think that in a world of AGI, humans will have all our needs met by machines? Or do you think there will always be space for humans to provide value to other humans, even if machines surpass us in intelligence?
  - TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
    Frankly, I think eventually machines will do it all. I see AGI as the universal automation that can do everything a human can - apart from “being human”.
    - someplaceguy 3y ago
      Well, that's it, isn't it? Even if AI can do everything, you'd still want the authentic human experience. 99% of people are far smarter than horses but people still pay to ride horses. I don't see why someone wouldn't want to pay to... ride me... uh, in a matter of speaking, of course (of course). I mean, look at me.
      - TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
        > 99% of people are far smarter than horses but people still pay to ride horses. How many working horses are there today vs before automobiles? Heck, how many domestic horses are there today vs before automobiles?

p1necone 3y ago

It bothers me a little bit as a programmer, but the rational part of my mind is aware that there's literally never been a major technological advancement in human history that didn't ultimately result in more people being employed, not less. Improvements in productivity just result in people realizing there's a whole new world of stuff they can now build that wasn't feasible before, and the market will eat that up. The shape of my career might change, but I doubt I'll be unable to find a job.

jquery 3y ago
Ask horses how they're doing these days... just because we've always found a use for humans because of their unique cognitive abilities doesn't mean we always will find a use. I think it's critical to be thinking about how to make sure wealth isn't simply funneled to a few capitalists who own everything simply by virtue of them being first, because it seems that's the future we're heading for if we aren't careful. I think you, and I, and everyone on HN will be fine (more or less...) but I am worried about a wide swath of people who will get "left behind."
- someplaceguy 3y ago
  > Ask horses how they're doing these days... It would be pointless. Do you even know that 99% of horses can't speak English? Anyway, my own experience tells me they're mostly just horsing around. A lot more leisure and a lot less work than a few centuries ago... Good times!
  - CaptWillard 3y ago
    "The [horse] population peaked in 1910 at 27.5 million, more than 600% higher than in 1840. What does the overall growth of horses and mules during the nineteenth century suggest about the relationship between animal power and the introduction of new mechanical technologies, including the steam engine?" https://energyhistory.yale.edu/horse-and-mule-population-statistics/ https://energyhistory.yale.edu/horse-and-mule-population-sta...

Turing_Machine 3y ago

Analogous viewpoint in the Eighteenth Century: "90% of the human race consists of agricultural laborers, mostly unfree (slaves or serfs). Steam-powered machinery will put almost all of those people out of work, turning the vast majority of humans into food-consuming sloths". Somehow that didn't happen, though.

an_aparallel 3y ago
it didnt happen?? not sure if you missed the /s ??
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  It did happen, and... it was fine. Agriculture's share of the labor force went from something like 70% in the early 20th century to something like 5% now. You have a higher purpose than doing a robot's job badly -- or a farmer's. Find it.