4 ms·

I agree with you and I am scared. My problem is: if most people can't work, who is going to pay for the product/services created with IA? I get a lot of "IA wi

by 101008 2y ago

I agree with you and I am scared. My problem is: if most people can't work, who is going to pay for the product/services created with IA? I get a lot of "IA will allow us to create SaaS in a weekend" and "IA will take engineers jobs", which I think they both may be true. But a lot of SaaS surive because engineers pay for them -- if engineer don't exist anymore, a lot of SaaS won't either. If you eat your potential customers, creating quick SaaS doesn't make sense anymore (yeah, there are exceptions, etc., I know).

immibis 2y ago
Those people will simply be surplus to requirements. They'll be left alone as long as they don't get in the way of the ruling class, and disposed of if they do. As usual in history.
- lodovic 2y ago
  That's a fallacy. You can't have an advanced economy with most people sitting on the side. Money needs to keep flowing. If all that remains of the economy consists of a few datacenters talking to each other, how can the ruling class profit off that?
  - palmotea 2y ago
    > You can't have an advanced economy with most people sitting on the side. If AI lives up to the hype, that will become possible. > If all that remains of the economy consists of a few datacenters talking to each other, how can the ruling class profit off that? I don't think it would be that. There'd also be power generation, manufacturing, mining, and construction, etc.; but all extremely automated. If you get to truly extreme levels of wealth concentration, things would shift out of our capitalist market system model, and concepts like "profit" would become anachronisms. It actually might kinda look like the "economy" of Starcraft: you gather resources, decide what to build with them, and order it all around according to your whim. There will be a handful of guys playing, and everyone else will be a NPC.
    - _w1tm 2y ago
      > It actually might kinda look like the "economy" of Starcraft: you gather resources, decide what to build with them, and order it all around according to your whim. There will be a handful of guys playing, and everyone else will be a NPC. I guess if the “players” are sociopathic enough they might decide to just wipe out the NPCs. The possibility of someone like Putin or Musk becoming the sole member of the post-singularity humanity does make me pause.
      - cubefox 2y ago
        That's assuming people like Altman can keep artificial superintelligence under human control. It very well may escape control and humanity would be disempowered forever. Or worse, wiped out.
  - danans 2y ago
    > Money needs to keep flowing. If all that remains of the economy consists of a few datacenters talking to each other, how can the ruling class profit off that? Plenty of profit was made off feudalism, and technofeudalism has all the tools of modern technology at its disposal. If things go in that direction, they will have an unlimited supply of serfs desperate for whatever human work/livelihood is left.
    - soco 2y ago
      Unlimited supply yes, but highly limited usage for them. So even if a few will work for free, the rest will be starving, and angry.
palmotea 2y ago
> My problem is: if most people can't work, who is going to pay for the product/services created with IA? A lot of those will probably go under, too. I think a lot of people are in for a rude awakening. The only people our society and economy really values are the elite with ownership and control, and the people who get to eat and have comfort are those who provide things that are directly or indirectly valuable to that elite. AI will enable a game of musical chairs, with economic participants iteratively eliminated as the technology advances, until there are only a few left controlling vast resources and capabilities, to be harnessed for personal whims. The rest of us will be like rats in a city, scraping by on the margins, unwanted, out of sight, subsisting on scraps, perhaps subject to "pest control" regimes.
- nazgul17 2y ago
  This is the same conclusion I can't help but reach. I would love nothing more but to be convinced that (there is a chance that) that is not going to happen.
- kortilla 2y ago
  > The only people our society and economy really values are the elite with ownership and control This isn’t true. The biggest companies are all rich because they cater to the massive US middle class. That’s where the big money is at.
  - palmotea 2y ago
    > This isn’t true. The biggest companies are all rich because they cater to the massive US middle class.. It is true, but I can see why you'd be confused. Let me ask you this: if members of the "the massive US middle class" can be replaced with automation, are those companies going 1) to keep paying those workers to support the middle-class demand which made them rich, or are they going to 2) fire them so more money can be shoveled up to the shareholders? The answer is obviously #2, which has been proven time and again (e.g. how we came to have "the Rust Belt"). > That’s where the big money is at Now, but not necessarily in the future. I think AI (if it doesn't hit a wall) will change that, maybe not instantaneously, but over time.

by 101008 2y ago

immibis 2y ago

Those people will simply be surplus to requirements. They'll be left alone as long as they don't get in the way of the ruling class, and disposed of if they do. As usual in history.

lodovic 2y ago
That's a fallacy. You can't have an advanced economy with most people sitting on the side. Money needs to keep flowing. If all that remains of the economy consists of a few datacenters talking to each other, how can the ruling class profit off that?
- palmotea 2y ago
  > You can't have an advanced economy with most people sitting on the side. If AI lives up to the hype, that will become possible. > If all that remains of the economy consists of a few datacenters talking to each other, how can the ruling class profit off that? I don't think it would be that. There'd also be power generation, manufacturing, mining, and construction, etc.; but all extremely automated. If you get to truly extreme levels of wealth concentration, things would shift out of our capitalist market system model, and concepts like "profit" would become anachronisms. It actually might kinda look like the "economy" of Starcraft: you gather resources, decide what to build with them, and order it all around according to your whim. There will be a handful of guys playing, and everyone else will be a NPC.
  - _w1tm 2y ago
    > It actually might kinda look like the "economy" of Starcraft: you gather resources, decide what to build with them, and order it all around according to your whim. There will be a handful of guys playing, and everyone else will be a NPC. I guess if the “players” are sociopathic enough they might decide to just wipe out the NPCs. The possibility of someone like Putin or Musk becoming the sole member of the post-singularity humanity does make me pause.
    - cubefox 2y ago
      That's assuming people like Altman can keep artificial superintelligence under human control. It very well may escape control and humanity would be disempowered forever. Or worse, wiped out.
- danans 2y ago
  > Money needs to keep flowing. If all that remains of the economy consists of a few datacenters talking to each other, how can the ruling class profit off that? Plenty of profit was made off feudalism, and technofeudalism has all the tools of modern technology at its disposal. If things go in that direction, they will have an unlimited supply of serfs desperate for whatever human work/livelihood is left.
  - soco 2y ago
    Unlimited supply yes, but highly limited usage for them. So even if a few will work for free, the rest will be starving, and angry.

palmotea 2y ago

> My problem is: if most people can't work, who is going to pay for the product/services created with IA? A lot of those will probably go under, too. I think a lot of people are in for a rude awakening. The only people our society and economy really values are the elite with ownership and control, and the people who get to eat and have comfort are those who provide things that are directly or indirectly valuable to that elite. AI will enable a game of musical chairs, with economic participants iteratively eliminated as the technology advances, until there are only a few left controlling vast resources and capabilities, to be harnessed for personal whims. The rest of us will be like rats in a city, scraping by on the margins, unwanted, out of sight, subsisting on scraps, perhaps subject to "pest control" regimes.

nazgul17 2y ago
This is the same conclusion I can't help but reach. I would love nothing more but to be convinced that (there is a chance that) that is not going to happen.
kortilla 2y ago
> The only people our society and economy really values are the elite with ownership and control This isn’t true. The biggest companies are all rich because they cater to the massive US middle class. That’s where the big money is at.
- palmotea 2y ago
  > This isn’t true. The biggest companies are all rich because they cater to the massive US middle class.. It is true, but I can see why you'd be confused. Let me ask you this: if members of the "the massive US middle class" can be replaced with automation, are those companies going 1) to keep paying those workers to support the middle-class demand which made them rich, or are they going to 2) fire them so more money can be shoveled up to the shareholders? The answer is obviously #2, which has been proven time and again (e.g. how we came to have "the Rust Belt"). > That’s where the big money is at Now, but not necessarily in the future. I think AI (if it doesn't hit a wall) will change that, maybe not instantaneously, but over time.