3 ms·

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 ch

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 2mo ago
It's actually the opposite and more complicated than that. AI-developed nootropics and germline editing will saturate human intelligence across individuals.
- whattheheckheck 2mo ago
  And distribution and will to take bioenhancements is equal across all intelligences?
  - kelseyfrog 2mo ago
    That is the null hypothesis, yes. Do you have evidence otherwise?
    - the_real_cher 2mo 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 2mo ago
        This is an inference, not evidence. It doesn't meet my epistemic standard necessary to reject the null hypothesis.
- PorciiVorbesc 2mo 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 2mo 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 2mo 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.

kelseyfrog 2mo ago

It's actually the opposite and more complicated than that. AI-developed nootropics and germline editing will saturate human intelligence across individuals.

whattheheckheck 2mo ago
And distribution and will to take bioenhancements is equal across all intelligences?
- kelseyfrog 2mo ago
  That is the null hypothesis, yes. Do you have evidence otherwise?
  - the_real_cher 2mo 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 2mo ago
      This is an inference, not evidence. It doesn't meet my epistemic standard necessary to reject the null hypothesis.
PorciiVorbesc 2mo 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 2mo 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 2mo 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.