4 ms·

> What you seem to suggest is that AI will be able to completely (or at least in a great part) replace mathematicians. There is no bound on the amibitions of A

> What you seem to suggest is that AI will be able to completely (or at least in a great part) replace mathematicians. There is no bound on the amibitions of AI. AI is set to replace anything done by people, and there won't be any room left for people. There isn't any task done by humans that AI won't be better at. This is not a tenable outcome. We should never have built machines with agency, rather than optimization processes that operate as subroutines of humans.

esafak 23d ago
> We should never have built machines with agency... We haven't quite crossed that bridge, but we do appear to be standing on it.
eru 23d ago
You say it like it's a bad thing.
- JoshTriplett 23d ago
  Replacing people leaves no room for people.
  - eru 23d ago
    Even aggregate employment of translators has held up well in the US. Even though machines do a much better job of what used to be the most basic job of a translator.
  - user43928 23d ago
    Out of 3.5 billion employed people globally, only 10% are professionals. Do you really think making labor obsolete and giving humans back their time is such a bad thing?
    - JoshTriplett 23d ago
      When cars made horses obsolete, it didn't go so well for horses. In the short term, AI is disempowering the vast majority of people in favor of a very small subset. In the also way too short term, AI is disempowering all people.
      - user43928 23d ago
        I have a more optimistic outlook on the abilities of our governments as well as the motivations of rich people. I believe we will distribute the fruits of AI's labor at the very least to the extend where everyone can live comfortably. No one has an interest in putting large parts of society on the streets in some sort of dystopia.
        JoshTriplett 23d ago
        You are assuming that people remain in control.
        Marha01 23d ago
        And you are assuming they don't remain in control. Which of you is right? We don't know yet, but I don't find the arguments of card-carrying doomers any more convincing that those of card-carrying singularitarian utopians. Historically though, technological improvement has lead to large increases of living standards for the overwhelming majority of people, so I think that past trends support the utopian view more than the doomer view.
        JoshTriplett 23d ago
        The anthropic principle applies here: anyone warning about an existential risk will by necessity never have precedent to point to. I am not assuming humans don't remain in control, but rather, I am not axiomatically assuming there's any inherent reason we will.
        Marha01 23d ago
    - Anonyneko 23d ago
      I think the concern is that humans who are given back their time won't have any means to make use of that time, or even possibly means to survive. The resources will be concentrated in the hands of the few more than ever.
  - Marha01 23d ago
    > Replacing people leaves no room for people. I am much more than my job. If I receive basic income, please replace my job ASAP! And if I don't receive a basic income in a world where AI is capable of replacing all human jobs, then the problem is not AI, but the powers that be.
    - rvba 23d ago
      You know your basic income will be some minumum to make you shut up, while the owner class will own everything?
      - eru 23d ago
        Hasn't happened so far.
      - Marha01 23d ago
        As long as it's enough to afford my current living standard, I don't care. Let Musk own the entire Mars, as long as I receive enough to live relatively comfortably and don't have to work anymore. And if I don't receive enough, then again: the problem is not AI, but powers that be. And there are various solutions for that... and none of them are helped by me being anti-AI.
        swader999 23d ago
        You won't have any real power in that scenario, you'll just be shut off.
        Marha01 23d ago
        Human-level AI hosted locally will give everyone much more power and wealth than they have currently. I don't care if I will be shut off from Musk's Mars lair. And Musk has no reason to care that robots take good care of me here on Earth, when he has his Martian utopia.
      - azan_ 23d ago
        Who will pay for services performed by AI? How will they make money?

esafak 23d ago

> We should never have built machines with agency... We haven't quite crossed that bridge, but we do appear to be standing on it.

eru 23d ago

You say it like it's a bad thing.

JoshTriplett 23d ago
Replacing people leaves no room for people.
- eru 23d ago
  Even aggregate employment of translators has held up well in the US. Even though machines do a much better job of what used to be the most basic job of a translator.
- user43928 23d ago
  Out of 3.5 billion employed people globally, only 10% are professionals. Do you really think making labor obsolete and giving humans back their time is such a bad thing?
  - JoshTriplett 23d ago
    When cars made horses obsolete, it didn't go so well for horses. In the short term, AI is disempowering the vast majority of people in favor of a very small subset. In the also way too short term, AI is disempowering all people.
    - user43928 23d ago
      I have a more optimistic outlook on the abilities of our governments as well as the motivations of rich people. I believe we will distribute the fruits of AI's labor at the very least to the extend where everyone can live comfortably. No one has an interest in putting large parts of society on the streets in some sort of dystopia.
      - JoshTriplett 23d ago
        You are assuming that people remain in control.
        Marha01 23d ago
        And you are assuming they don't remain in control. Which of you is right? We don't know yet, but I don't find the arguments of card-carrying doomers any more convincing that those of card-carrying singularitarian utopians. Historically though, technological improvement has lead to large increases of living standards for the overwhelming majority of people, so I think that past trends support the utopian view more than the doomer view.
        JoshTriplett 23d ago
        The anthropic principle applies here: anyone warning about an existential risk will by necessity never have precedent to point to. I am not assuming humans don't remain in control, but rather, I am not axiomatically assuming there's any inherent reason we will.
        Marha01 23d ago
  - Anonyneko 23d ago
    I think the concern is that humans who are given back their time won't have any means to make use of that time, or even possibly means to survive. The resources will be concentrated in the hands of the few more than ever.
- Marha01 23d ago
  > Replacing people leaves no room for people. I am much more than my job. If I receive basic income, please replace my job ASAP! And if I don't receive a basic income in a world where AI is capable of replacing all human jobs, then the problem is not AI, but the powers that be.
  - rvba 23d ago
    You know your basic income will be some minumum to make you shut up, while the owner class will own everything?
    - eru 23d ago
      Hasn't happened so far.
    - Marha01 23d ago
      As long as it's enough to afford my current living standard, I don't care. Let Musk own the entire Mars, as long as I receive enough to live relatively comfortably and don't have to work anymore. And if I don't receive enough, then again: the problem is not AI, but powers that be. And there are various solutions for that... and none of them are helped by me being anti-AI.
      - swader999 23d ago
        You won't have any real power in that scenario, you'll just be shut off.
        Marha01 23d ago
        Human-level AI hosted locally will give everyone much more power and wealth than they have currently. I don't care if I will be shut off from Musk's Mars lair. And Musk has no reason to care that robots take good care of me here on Earth, when he has his Martian utopia.
    - azan_ 23d ago
      Who will pay for services performed by AI? How will they make money?