4 ms·
I would love for the Pope to answer this question: If a technology existed that reduced the cost of producing a critical thing (think food, housing, medical ca
by pj_mukh 5mo ago
I would love for the Pope to answer this question:
If a technology existed that reduced the cost of producing a critical thing (think food, housing, medical care) down to near zero, however, it made the humans currently building the thing redundant, should we build it? Would it be okay to use the hyper-optimization power of Capitalism to build such a technology faster?
Before someone yells at me about this not being the current situation, I think that is the endgame of most of this AI development and in fact the endgame is even more comforting: If it takes 10 construction workers at $60,000/annum to build one home, I can forsee the descendants of current AI tech enabling 10 construction workers at $150,000/annum building 5 homes in the same time with an even larger profit margin for the corporation involved.
But as a clear moral quandary, I think the Pope should consider the first situation.
- djsamseng 5mo ago[flagged]
- nemomarx 5mo agoIf the technology is used to serve humanity by providing food or housing, it seems like his stance would be approving. But if it was used to increase profits and people still starved that would be bad, right? "AI must be used for the good of humanity" isn't even an anti ai position really.
- pj_mukh 5mo ago"by providing food or housing" vs "if it was used to increase profits" Why..not both? I know this question is naive, but there is nothing that "hard-codes" AI to only increase profits at the cost of providing food or housing for much cheaper prices. Yes a Private equity firm could later insert itself and jack up prices and play such games, but that isn't baked into the technology itself. And as such, the technology seems the wrong thing to be litigating.
- jdjdjxixismns 5mo ago[dead]
- AvAn12 5mo agoTech is supposed to be a tool that serves other products ends, not an end in itself. At this point, tech biz leaders are massively over-reaching and trying to influence the rest of us: muxk, thiel, Karp, etc. So it should be no surprise that the rest of us are ready, willing and able to push back just as hard. tech biz leads should just run their companies and stop trying to play president or god
- pj_mukh 5mo ago"At this point, tech biz leaders are massively over-reaching and trying to influence the rest of us:" I realize this is what's happening on the headlines, but most of the technology being "deployed" is back-office automation, robotics etc. that no one writes about and none of the tech baddies have monopolistic control over. I refuse to let muxk, thiel, Karp to run the conversation and setup the reaction either. It is exciting and dramatic but not necessarily influential.
- squidbeak 5mo agoThere aren't any profits with full automation - but there is instead total power for whoever owns that automation.
- pj_mukh 5mo agoIf it’s a monopoly yes. But there are massive profits in full automation. I’m not expecting costs to go to zero but it’s the only pathway to things getting cheaper by a lot.
- squidbeak 5mo agoWhere are these profits coming from? Remember, under full automation there aren't any workers earning salaries. Meanwhile, costs of production fall to zero. So what will there be for these profitable companies to spend their profits on?
- gbibas 5mo agoThis makes me think of enlightened self interest. If the tech elite crush everyone by automating too fast then the economy collapses and people don’t have the money to pay them and their advertisers, so it will wind up hurting them directly too. Enlightened self interest SHOULD keep those same people in check finding a way to use the technology to empower advances in efficiency that empower people not just corporations. But the AI leaders don’t outwardly seem to think about these issues, and when asked just brush past them. We should not stop tech progress even if it were possible in a global competitive environment (which it is not), but there are some moral issues that should guide tech leaders in decision making, not just profit motives.
- jdjdjxixismns 5mo ago[dead]
- geremiiah 5mo agoThe Catholic Church has at present no answer to that question. The contemporary political-economic stance of the Catholic Church is based on economic liberalism and capitalism and maintaining a just balance between capital and labour, as indeed mentioned in the encyclical itself. I don't think anyone has an answer to that question at present, honestly.