6 ms·

The End Of Upward Mobility – AI is coming for the meritocracy

19 points by meep_meep_meep 13d ago

rayiner 13d ago
But this is a good thing for egalitarians. It offsets one of the most unfair aspects of the knowledge economy: that some people get to have much more fulfilling and remunerative careers than average people because they were lucky enough to be born smart.
- PorciiVorbesc 13d ago
  It's actually the opposite. People who are "born smart", will leverage AI to get more knowledgeable even faster, use it to learn new things faster, use it to churn through data to find patterns and opportunities, and use it to do labor for them, so they can make even more money than those not born smart, who will just use AI to ask it what's 3x3 and if the earth is flat.
  - kelseyfrog 13d ago
    It's actually the opposite and more complicated than that. AI-developed nootropics and germline editing will saturate human intelligence across individuals.
    - whattheheckheck 13d ago
      And distribution and will to take bioenhancements is equal across all intelligences?
      - kelseyfrog 13d ago
        That is the null hypothesis, yes. Do you have evidence otherwise?
        the_real_cher 13d ago
        A good portion of people hate A.I. and won't even use it...they won't use a computer program to enhance their intellience, much less taking a pill...
        kelseyfrog 13d ago
        This is an inference, not evidence. It doesn't meet my epistemic standard necessary to reject the null hypothesis.
    - PorciiVorbesc 13d ago
      If only popping pills were the easy hack to people getting smarter. That's like saying drinking coffee will make people go faster.
  - toasty228 13d ago
    Inequalities have been growing for a while now, either we have less and less smart people, or it just does not work like you think it works, probably because your take is super naive and barely scratches the surface of first order effects while ignoring everything else
    - PorciiVorbesc 13d ago
      >Inequalities have been growing for a while now I never said it hasn't. >either we have less and less smart people, or it just does not work like you think it works How do you think I think it works? > probably because your take is super naive and barely scratches the surface of first order effects while ignoring everything else Please, explain what you think my take is so that I can counter it. Because i feel like you missed my point entirely and are going on tangents parallel to what I said.
watwut 13d ago
It was not meritocracy. And the thing that cane for whatever merit based advantages were was not AI, but capture of politics by moneyed interests. K shaped economy is not result of AI.
the_real_cher 13d ago
It seems to me that historically there was a high water mark for what people were able to accomplish on their own and all people, dumb to smart, fell somewhere at or below that high water mark. My opinion is that our current generation of A.I. will just raise the high water mark for what's possible. Until we have AGI, ASI, or Recursively improving AI....A.I. in it's current form is a tool that adds a constant to some peoples intelligence and an exponent to other peoples intelligence...and many people of all intelligences refuse to use it.

But this is a good thing for egalitarians. It offsets one of the most unfair aspects of the knowledge economy: that some people get to have much more fulfilling and remunerative careers than average people because they were lucky enough to be born smart.

PorciiVorbesc 13d ago
It's actually the opposite. People who are "born smart", will leverage AI to get more knowledgeable even faster, use it to learn new things faster, use it to churn through data to find patterns and opportunities, and use it to do labor for them, so they can make even more money than those not born smart, who will just use AI to ask it what's 3x3 and if the earth is flat.
- kelseyfrog 13d ago
  It's actually the opposite and more complicated than that. AI-developed nootropics and germline editing will saturate human intelligence across individuals.
  - whattheheckheck 13d ago
    And distribution and will to take bioenhancements is equal across all intelligences?
    - kelseyfrog 13d ago
      That is the null hypothesis, yes. Do you have evidence otherwise?
      - the_real_cher 13d ago
        A good portion of people hate A.I. and won't even use it...they won't use a computer program to enhance their intellience, much less taking a pill...
        kelseyfrog 13d ago
        This is an inference, not evidence. It doesn't meet my epistemic standard necessary to reject the null hypothesis.
  - PorciiVorbesc 13d ago
    If only popping pills were the easy hack to people getting smarter. That's like saying drinking coffee will make people go faster.
- toasty228 13d ago
  Inequalities have been growing for a while now, either we have less and less smart people, or it just does not work like you think it works, probably because your take is super naive and barely scratches the surface of first order effects while ignoring everything else
  - PorciiVorbesc 13d ago
    >Inequalities have been growing for a while now I never said it hasn't. >either we have less and less smart people, or it just does not work like you think it works How do you think I think it works? > probably because your take is super naive and barely scratches the surface of first order effects while ignoring everything else Please, explain what you think my take is so that I can counter it. Because i feel like you missed my point entirely and are going on tangents parallel to what I said.

watwut 13d ago

It was not meritocracy. And the thing that cane for whatever merit based advantages were was not AI, but capture of politics by moneyed interests. K shaped economy is not result of AI.

the_real_cher 13d ago

It seems to me that historically there was a high water mark for what people were able to accomplish on their own and all people, dumb to smart, fell somewhere at or below that high water mark. My opinion is that our current generation of A.I. will just raise the high water mark for what's possible. Until we have AGI, ASI, or Recursively improving AI....A.I. in it's current form is a tool that adds a constant to some peoples intelligence and an exponent to other peoples intelligence...and many people of all intelligences refuse to use it.