5 ms·

> Nobody benefits by having less time to adapt Not exactly true. If AI goes from 0 to 100 quickly (human level AGI in a few years), we will all lose our jobs t

by Marha01 2mo ago

> Nobody benefits by having less time to adapt Not exactly true. If AI goes from 0 to 100 quickly (human level AGI in a few years), we will all lose our jobs together and will have to confront this fact. There is no ignoring such massive societal elephant in the room. If instead AI improves slowly, lots of people will lose their jobs, but majority will not. Those still with jobs may not be persuaded by the sizable jobless minority to support any societal changes, since they are still OK. This means the jobless will be screwed.

zero_shift 2mo ago
Firstly, this generation of AI is not going to take away all jobs Secondly, we already know what happens when sectors face mass unemployment from the 1980s, when steel and coal workers were laid off en-masse: nobody came to help Accelerationists want to see their jobs go up in smoke because they think that if enough white collar workers are impoverished, everyone who was formerly poorer than them, will chip in to rescue us Just like they didn't in 1985... In a context where the state already has less tax revenue due to mass unemployment! It's completely bananas thinking that only survives on internet brainrot forums
- Marha01 2mo ago
  > Firstly, AI is not going to take away all jobs Human-level AGI is by definition able to take away all human jobs. > Secondly, we already know what happens when sectors face mass unemployment from the 1980s, when steel and coal workers were laid off en-masse: nobody came to help There is a massive difference between 20-30% of people in a country being unemployed (historical sector-wide collapses), and 80-100% of people in a country being unemployed (human-level AGI unemployment). The second situation is completely historically unprecedented and will *not* lead to the same results. > In a context where the state already has less tax revenue due to mass unemployment! If human-level AGI is an actual reality, taxation (and money itself) is no longer relevant. Only energy and resources may still matter.
  - watwut 2mo ago
    > 80-100% unemployed This would mean that there are no AI companies at all, because there is no one to buy their products. So, they have nowhere to get money for whatever they want to sell.
    - andrekandre 2mo ago
      its basically the end of capitalism... for better or worse...
      - watwut 2mo ago
        To compare, great depression had 25.6 unemployment rate. It helped the WWII to happen. It wont be the end of capitalism. But, it would mean major outbursts of violence and major civil war or revolution. Where AI companies will be (deservely) the hate targets. But my point really was that it is economic nonsense.
        Marha01 2mo ago
        > Where AI companies will be (deservely) the hate targets. That depends on what those companies do in response. Giving away robot-produced stuff for free could quicky earn them praise, instead of hate. If human-level robots enable massive increases in efficiency and production, at least one of the companies will decide to mitigate any risks in this way.
        watwut 2mo ago
        You are severely underestimating how much free stuff would 349,163,268 of American citizens need to make a small difference. To achieve that, they would need to steal farms from current owners. And they will be hated, because they stripped people of future and bought in violent hellscape for literally everyone.
        Marha01 2mo ago

by Marha01 2mo ago

zero_shift 2mo ago

Firstly, this generation of AI is not going to take away all jobs Secondly, we already know what happens when sectors face mass unemployment from the 1980s, when steel and coal workers were laid off en-masse: nobody came to help Accelerationists want to see their jobs go up in smoke because they think that if enough white collar workers are impoverished, everyone who was formerly poorer than them, will chip in to rescue us Just like they didn't in 1985... In a context where the state already has less tax revenue due to mass unemployment! It's completely bananas thinking that only survives on internet brainrot forums

Marha01 2mo ago
> Firstly, AI is not going to take away all jobs Human-level AGI is by definition able to take away all human jobs. > Secondly, we already know what happens when sectors face mass unemployment from the 1980s, when steel and coal workers were laid off en-masse: nobody came to help There is a massive difference between 20-30% of people in a country being unemployed (historical sector-wide collapses), and 80-100% of people in a country being unemployed (human-level AGI unemployment). The second situation is completely historically unprecedented and will *not* lead to the same results. > In a context where the state already has less tax revenue due to mass unemployment! If human-level AGI is an actual reality, taxation (and money itself) is no longer relevant. Only energy and resources may still matter.
- watwut 2mo ago
  > 80-100% unemployed This would mean that there are no AI companies at all, because there is no one to buy their products. So, they have nowhere to get money for whatever they want to sell.
  - andrekandre 2mo ago
    its basically the end of capitalism... for better or worse...
    - watwut 2mo ago
      To compare, great depression had 25.6 unemployment rate. It helped the WWII to happen. It wont be the end of capitalism. But, it would mean major outbursts of violence and major civil war or revolution. Where AI companies will be (deservely) the hate targets. But my point really was that it is economic nonsense.
      - Marha01 2mo ago
        > Where AI companies will be (deservely) the hate targets. That depends on what those companies do in response. Giving away robot-produced stuff for free could quicky earn them praise, instead of hate. If human-level robots enable massive increases in efficiency and production, at least one of the companies will decide to mitigate any risks in this way.
        watwut 2mo ago
        You are severely underestimating how much free stuff would 349,163,268 of American citizens need to make a small difference. To achieve that, they would need to steal farms from current owners. And they will be hated, because they stripped people of future and bought in violent hellscape for literally everyone.
        Marha01 2mo ago