3 ms·
Fortunately it's extremely unlikely. There was a change in the world, which went largely unnoticed - sometime in 2013-2017 the global number of infants peaked,
by Tade0 2mo ago
Fortunately it's extremely unlikely.
There was a change in the world, which went largely unnoticed - sometime in 2013-2017 the global number of infants peaked, never to recover.
Those 20% would just figure that there's no need to have children when you can just focus on yourself and go largely extinct within a generation, replaced with some people from the higher tiers, but not nearly enough to make up for those who weren't born.
This actually has been happening without AI for a while now, but I imagine technology would accelerate the process.
- DowsingSpoon 2mo ago> Those 20% would just figure that there's no need to have children when you can just focus on yourself and go largely extinct within a generation, replaced with some people from the higher tiers, but not nearly enough to make up for those who weren't born. A person being _unemployed_ is not a hereditary trait. Also, while it's already pretty wild to effectively claim that about 20% of humanity carries some kind _doomed to be made unemployable by AI_ gene, it's another giant leap beyond that to declaring this cohort will uniformly choose not to reproduce and therefore become extinct.
- Tade0 2mo agoIt doesn't need to be hereditary. Just needs to be in the range where on one hand a person doesn't want the next generation to go through the same and on the other, where making the most out of their current situation means not starting a family. It's what's happening right now, just with poverty being the largest factor. Gig/minimum wage workers start families considerably less often and no wonder - how they are supposed to?