3 ms·

How can you ”update” the model in 2025 yet not take ai or the collapse of american democracy and global trust into account?

HPsquared 1y ago
"Limits to Modelling" would be a good name for a rebuttal.
- johanneskanybal 1y ago
  Sure, I agree but usually around here there's some inteligent discussions so someone just accepting this without taking this into consideration seems weird. Pretty sure we can make food production more efficient and that it won't hinder human development..
psalaun 1y ago
I guess IA is factored in Meadows quote about technology able to push the limit farther for a while but make the fall harder? Say that IA allow us to squeeze the additional juice from the torn lemon for five more decades, given the toll that it may have on our ability to think by ourselves, the bulk of people may have troubles coming up with 19th century tech and rely on good ol' donkeys for producing food and materials instead of what we would currently see as low tech solutions, when the shit will hit the proverbial fan
- johanneskanybal 1y ago
  If you mean AI when you sai IA I think it's bigger than this. It's ironic at the point of time where it definitly starts to outperform humans in most regards we have maybe the most failing governance in modern history. I don't expect humans to be presidents in 10 years. -
Qwertious 1y ago
Neither of those two things have mature economic datasets showing their effects - the collapse of american democracy has only majorly affected the economy very recently, and AI is still mostly promises and hasn't brought in the trillions of profits it's promised yet.
- baq 1y ago
  The end goal of AI isn’t the trillions made getting there, it’s to make those trillions meaningless. What’s the point of money if machines do literally everything better than humans?

3 ms·

How can you ”update” the model in 2025 yet not take ai or the collapse of american democracy and global trust into account?

by johanneskanybal 1y ago

HPsquared 1y ago
"Limits to Modelling" would be a good name for a rebuttal.
- johanneskanybal 1y ago
  Sure, I agree but usually around here there's some inteligent discussions so someone just accepting this without taking this into consideration seems weird. Pretty sure we can make food production more efficient and that it won't hinder human development..
psalaun 1y ago
I guess IA is factored in Meadows quote about technology able to push the limit farther for a while but make the fall harder? Say that IA allow us to squeeze the additional juice from the torn lemon for five more decades, given the toll that it may have on our ability to think by ourselves, the bulk of people may have troubles coming up with 19th century tech and rely on good ol' donkeys for producing food and materials instead of what we would currently see as low tech solutions, when the shit will hit the proverbial fan
- johanneskanybal 1y ago
  If you mean AI when you sai IA I think it's bigger than this. It's ironic at the point of time where it definitly starts to outperform humans in most regards we have maybe the most failing governance in modern history. I don't expect humans to be presidents in 10 years. -
Qwertious 1y ago
Neither of those two things have mature economic datasets showing their effects - the collapse of american democracy has only majorly affected the economy very recently, and AI is still mostly promises and hasn't brought in the trillions of profits it's promised yet.
- baq 1y ago
  The end goal of AI isn’t the trillions made getting there, it’s to make those trillions meaningless. What’s the point of money if machines do literally everything better than humans?