3 ms·

at human-level AGI there would be no need for people to 'buy' when the machines can just do

by vanuatu 2mo ago

watwut 2mo ago
If people dont buy, company does not have money nor income. Simple as that. There will be no need to use those machines, because you cant sell the output of those machines. So, you have starwing hopeless population not buying your products. Which means you cant produce. Which means, you eventually become part of that starwing population (or they kill you in some outburst).
- Marha01 2mo ago
  You are still thinking in terms of monetary economics about a situation where money is no longer needed. In a monetary economy, if you need X, you need the money to buy it. In a post-AGI economy, if you need X, you ask your human-level robots to make it (including making more robots). No money involved at all.
  - vrganj 2mo ago
    Money is just an abstraction for resources. You'll still need land, energy, minerals etc.
    - Marha01 2mo ago
      Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land.
      - vrganj 2mo ago
        > Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. On who's land? With who's energy? > They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land. Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete?
        Marha01 2mo ago
        > Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete? Land is an inherently limited resource, so some kind of money might still exist for that, even after the singularity. The point is: whatever process exists to obtain land after the singularity, the robots can do it.
        vrganj 2mo ago
        > Land is an inherently limited resource Yes, that's my point exactly. > whatever process exists to obtain land after the singularity, the robots can do it Who's robots? Who will get all this land? And its spoils, and the robots that multiply them? Because your utopia sounds like a recipe for making our oligarchs even more powerful at the expense of the rest of us. It sounds like a slide into neofeudalism. The already existing don't even need labor to multiply their riches anymore, the rest of us will be robbed of being able to trade our labor for even basic subsistence.
        Marha01 2mo ago
        You are missing the point: robotic labor does not create anything "at the expense of the rest of us". It's not some stock market speculation, but real productivity increase. The pie of wealth is not fixed, the robots actually enlarge it, massively. The robot owning class wil not be some exclusive billionaire club: as the price of robots comes down (inevitable, with any technology, doubly so with one that can make itself), essentially everyone will own one, just like almost everyone owns a car today (or could own one if they needed it). Worst case scenario: you will live exactly as you live today, with one change: instead of you having to do your job, your robot will do it for you, and you gain more free time.
        vrganj 2mo ago
        I believe you are missing the point. You've already conceded that there is inherently limited resources like land. These are going to be the limiting factor in any economic system, the key question is always how you distribute these. Robots will not magically produce more land. What they will do is that the ones with the capital to buy many robots will be able to use those robots to then buy up all the land and then extract the resources from there to build even more robots etc. No resources for you and me. No robots for us either. Why are you talking about prices going down? We're making money obsolete, remember? Why would they even sell us robots when they already own all the land and all the resources to make as many robots as they want? Sure, the pie will get bigger. But you ain't getting a slice. What leverage would the vast majority of people have? If the oligarchs own all the robots and land and resources, how do we even ensure basic subsistence? Our labor is worthless. Our money is worthless. What stops them from... simply not sharing? The goodness of their hearts?
      - goatlover 2mo ago
        In this speculative scenario, robots could do that, but they can't just do it anywhere as it depends on where the minerals and land is at and who owns it, where power plants can be built, how supplies get shipped. The idea that economics goes out the windows in a post-AGI world is highly speculative and not a situation that has ever happened in the real world.
        Marha01 2mo ago
        I did not say economics goes out of the window, I said monetary economics. With cheap robotic labor, many resource mines that are currently not economically viable will become viable, so basic resources will become much more plentiful. The new economics will probably be based on needed energy, direct tally of needed material resources, or the number of robot-hours something takes to do.
  - watwut 2mo ago
    Like they will magically create metal and food from nothing? Of course not, you will need to barter for those if there are no money. Will they create also water that will be getting more expensive due data center consumption? This is absurd.
    - Marha01 2mo ago
      > Like they will magically create metal and food from nothing? Not from nothing. How do humans create metal and food? Mining and farming. You ask your human-level robots to do the same. Human-level robots can by definition do everything humans can do, including gathering basic resources and growing food. > Will they create also water that will be getting more expensive due data center consumption? Data center consumption of water is miniscule compared to other uses. But yes, you ask the robots to make you water, for example by building desalination plants. Even if there is still monetary economy, and you come to the conclusion that buying something is the best way to get it, you simply ask your robots to think of a way to earn you money by performing work for others, or making things to sell on the market. If they are truly human-level, they can do it. > This is absurd. This is the reality, if human-level AI and robotics is developed.
      - watwut 2mo ago
        > Mining and farming. So, the plan is that AI companies will steal the mines and land from their current owners? Like, you plan to use those robots to beat up the owners and take their stuff? If your actual plan is such fascist takeover where AI companies bully everyone else, then everyone else is entirely valid to wage war against you before you are close to that goal. > Data center consumption of water is miniscule compared to other uses. But yes, you ask the robots to make you water, for example by building desalination plants. The water is getting too expensive now. Why are they not doing that now already? Technology is there and work is not the most expensive part of this. Same with energy. So, you plan to take over the power plants by force? And take over the land to build them on? These AI companies could be building power plants, could even pick places where they dont give kids asthma already ... but they are choosing not to. > This is the reality, if human-level AI and robotics is developed. No, it is not reality. You are ignoring reality. Robotics does not imply end of economics. The end of economics will happen only if you win war and install an odious violent autocracy. Which I understand is an intentional goal of current CEOs and their fans. I both disagree with that goal and find it, frankly, stupid.

at human-level AGI there would be no need for people to 'buy' when the machines can just do

by vanuatu 2mo ago

at human-level AGI there would be no need for people to 'buy' when the machines can just do

If people dont buy, company does not have money nor income. Simple as that. There will be no need to use those machines, because you cant sell the output of those machines. So, you have starwing hopeless population not buying your products. Which means you cant produce. Which means, you eventually become part of that starwing population (or they kill you in some outburst).

Marha01 2mo ago
You are still thinking in terms of monetary economics about a situation where money is no longer needed. In a monetary economy, if you need X, you need the money to buy it. In a post-AGI economy, if you need X, you ask your human-level robots to make it (including making more robots). No money involved at all.
- vrganj 2mo ago
  Money is just an abstraction for resources. You'll still need land, energy, minerals etc.
  - Marha01 2mo ago
    Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land.
    - vrganj 2mo ago
      > Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. On who's land? With who's energy? > They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land. Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete?
      - Marha01 2mo ago
        > Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete? Land is an inherently limited resource, so some kind of money might still exist for that, even after the singularity. The point is: whatever process exists to obtain land after the singularity, the robots can do it.
        vrganj 2mo ago
        > Land is an inherently limited resource Yes, that's my point exactly. > whatever process exists to obtain land after the singularity, the robots can do it Who's robots? Who will get all this land? And its spoils, and the robots that multiply them? Because your utopia sounds like a recipe for making our oligarchs even more powerful at the expense of the rest of us. It sounds like a slide into neofeudalism. The already existing don't even need labor to multiply their riches anymore, the rest of us will be robbed of being able to trade our labor for even basic subsistence.
        Marha01 2mo ago
        You are missing the point: robotic labor does not create anything "at the expense of the rest of us". It's not some stock market speculation, but real productivity increase. The pie of wealth is not fixed, the robots actually enlarge it, massively. The robot owning class wil not be some exclusive billionaire club: as the price of robots comes down (inevitable, with any technology, doubly so with one that can make itself), essentially everyone will own one, just like almost everyone owns a car today (or could own one if they needed it). Worst case scenario: you will live exactly as you live today, with one change: instead of you having to do your job, your robot will do it for you, and you gain more free time.
        vrganj 2mo ago
        I believe you are missing the point. You've already conceded that there is inherently limited resources like land. These are going to be the limiting factor in any economic system, the key question is always how you distribute these. Robots will not magically produce more land. What they will do is that the ones with the capital to buy many robots will be able to use those robots to then buy up all the land and then extract the resources from there to build even more robots etc. No resources for you and me. No robots for us either. Why are you talking about prices going down? We're making money obsolete, remember? Why would they even sell us robots when they already own all the land and all the resources to make as many robots as they want? Sure, the pie will get bigger. But you ain't getting a slice. What leverage would the vast majority of people have? If the oligarchs own all the robots and land and resources, how do we even ensure basic subsistence? Our labor is worthless. Our money is worthless. What stops them from... simply not sharing? The goodness of their hearts?
    - goatlover 2mo ago
      In this speculative scenario, robots could do that, but they can't just do it anywhere as it depends on where the minerals and land is at and who owns it, where power plants can be built, how supplies get shipped. The idea that economics goes out the windows in a post-AGI world is highly speculative and not a situation that has ever happened in the real world.
      - Marha01 2mo ago
        I did not say economics goes out of the window, I said monetary economics. With cheap robotic labor, many resource mines that are currently not economically viable will become viable, so basic resources will become much more plentiful. The new economics will probably be based on needed energy, direct tally of needed material resources, or the number of robot-hours something takes to do.
- watwut 2mo ago
  Like they will magically create metal and food from nothing? Of course not, you will need to barter for those if there are no money. Will they create also water that will be getting more expensive due data center consumption? This is absurd.
  - Marha01 2mo ago
    > Like they will magically create metal and food from nothing? Not from nothing. How do humans create metal and food? Mining and farming. You ask your human-level robots to do the same. Human-level robots can by definition do everything humans can do, including gathering basic resources and growing food. > Will they create also water that will be getting more expensive due data center consumption? Data center consumption of water is miniscule compared to other uses. But yes, you ask the robots to make you water, for example by building desalination plants. Even if there is still monetary economy, and you come to the conclusion that buying something is the best way to get it, you simply ask your robots to think of a way to earn you money by performing work for others, or making things to sell on the market. If they are truly human-level, they can do it. > This is absurd. This is the reality, if human-level AI and robotics is developed.
    - watwut 2mo ago
      > Mining and farming. So, the plan is that AI companies will steal the mines and land from their current owners? Like, you plan to use those robots to beat up the owners and take their stuff? If your actual plan is such fascist takeover where AI companies bully everyone else, then everyone else is entirely valid to wage war against you before you are close to that goal. > Data center consumption of water is miniscule compared to other uses. But yes, you ask the robots to make you water, for example by building desalination plants. The water is getting too expensive now. Why are they not doing that now already? Technology is there and work is not the most expensive part of this. Same with energy. So, you plan to take over the power plants by force? And take over the land to build them on? These AI companies could be building power plants, could even pick places where they dont give kids asthma already ... but they are choosing not to. > This is the reality, if human-level AI and robotics is developed. No, it is not reality. You are ignoring reality. Robotics does not imply end of economics. The end of economics will happen only if you win war and install an odious violent autocracy. Which I understand is an intentional goal of current CEOs and their fans. I both disagree with that goal and find it, frankly, stupid.