A thread for unboxing AI
The rapid progression of AI chatbots made me think that we need a thread devoted to a discussion of the impact that AI i
Would it be sensational to say most modern economic issues seem like they don't really matter much given what is on the horizon with AI? Debt, deficits, taxes, tariffs...All this stuff just seems increasingly moot and the fact we're about to live through our own version of the industrial revolution is really all that matters.
Anybody got any good AI pods/books/people to follow?
I just listen to the all-in podcast but it is hard to find good content on the subject given everyone seems to be in the A. it is going to leave people jobless and destitute and eventually kill everyone or B. it is going to be the greatest breakthrough ever and people will only have to work 20 hour weeks and thats if they want to
Would it be sensational to say most modern economic issues seem like they don't really matter much given what is on the horizon with AI? Debt, deficits, taxes, tariffs...All this stuff just seems increasingly moot and the fact we're about to live through our own version of the industrial revolution is really all that matters.Anybody got any good AI pods/books/people to follow?
i think yours is the proper approach BUT there is a non-null chance AI doesn't pan out to be as disruptive as consensus thinks.
in which case having disregarded all the other issues could backfire.
not sure the industrial revolution is a good prior. it took a long while and it lifted the quality of life of basically everyone included people who worked only with their own hands. they either moved elsewhere or found artisanal niches which paid more than before anyway.
a better prior would be something that very quickly disrupts a lot (while bringing prosperity), like finding a lot of oil in a very small country.
I think AI, if it pans out as the consensus thinks, will play more like Kuwait finding oil than like the industrial revolution
Google deepmind is close to solve the Navier Stokes existence and smoothness problem with the help of AI
lol
Federal Reserve's statutory objectives of maximum employment and stable prices.
Maybe that means just what it says. Of course we could legislate that away but to capital that's like letting a factory sit idle for 20 hours a week.
lol
Maybe that means just what it says. Of course we could legislate that away but to capital that's like letting a factory sit idle for 20 hours a week.
A popular (albeit occasionally controversial) view in anthropology is that hunter-gatherers would usually work from 15-20 hours a week.
So basically, the neolithic revolution was a sham.
Spoiler
A popular (albeit occasionally controversial) view in anthropology is that hunter-gatherers would usually work from 15-20 hours a week.
Most importantly, the members of the tribe who couldn't/wouldn't work were culled as sacrifices to the gods.
Plus, not a single smartphone in sight. What the hell would modern humans even do with all those extra hours in a day?
It might only take 15-20 hours a week to gather enough berries to avoid starvation and slap another coat of mud on your hut, but that's a LOT of time to kill without the internet. There's only so much sex and drugs a man can handle.
A popular (albeit occasionally controversial) view in anthropology is that hunter-gatherers would usually work from 15-20 hours a week. So basically, the neolithic revolution was a sham.
Spoiler
The fairly uncontroversial part is that for thousands of years, neolithic populations lived worse than H&Gs.
Lower life expectancy, higher child mortality, worse nutrition both calory-wise and nutrient-wise. Horribly worse exposure to nefarious diseases.
And yet we live in a veritable utopia with the longest life expectancy, lowest child mortality, best available nutrition or calory rich diet ever, and unequivocal disease control through vaccinations and you constantly complain about this utopia because of the liberal ideology that got us here
What a hypocrite
And yet we live in a veritable utopia with the longest life expectancy, lowest child mortality, best available nutrition or calory rich diet ever, and unequivocal disease control through vaccinations and you constantly complain about this utopia because of the liberal ideology that got us here
What a hypocrite
uh? I don't complain about the benefits of modernity, you must be confusing me with someone else. I complain about the forces that do their best to ruin what we have and have been for a long while now attempting their best to slow the rate of increase of material prosperity. Like people who want to dramatically impoverish our lifestyles because of "the climate". Or people who want to redistribute wealth away from wealth creators, because of "inequality".
Btw the "neolithic populations had it really bad" is more about the fact that without that, we wouldn't be where we are, but still it took a few thousands years of a lot of people living worse than otherwise to reach it
So in your mental model, the liberal thoughts and policies that took us from the 1890s to today are the same liberal thoughts and policies that will decrease these prosperities and impoverish our lifestyles despite being the same liberal thoughts and policies that took us from the 1890s to today
You don't see how your entire mental model is problematic?
So in your mental model, the liberal thoughts and policies that took us from the 1890s to today are the same liberal thoughts and policies that will decrease these prosperities and impoverish our lifestyles despite being the same liberal thoughts and policies that took us from the 1890s to today
You don't see how your entire mental model is problematic?
Don't you think this is a complete derail of a thread dedicated to something else? you can ask me the same question in 5 or more other threads where we discuss general politics.
This is the thread where you are making it clear that your entire world view is hypocritical nonsense so not sure where else I should point that out
No because it's about how dramatic changes to our societies caused by technology don't automatically provide benefits immediately which is very on topic when discussing AI, which could change society as much as agriculture or industrialization did (if not more).
What part of that conversation felt not kn topic to you?
Most importantly, the members of the tribe who couldn't/wouldn't work were culled as sacrifices to the gods.
As far as currently available evidence suggests, human sacrifice of that type is something we see come with the neolithic revolution, and the same goes for organized religion.
Plus, not a single smartphone in sight. What the hell would modern humans even do with all those extra hours in a day?
It might only take 15-20 hours a week to gather enough berries to avoid starvation and slap another coat of mud on your hut, but that's a LOT of time to kill without the internet. There's only so much sex and drugs a man can handle.
On the plus side you don't have to live with a small glass and metal thing with millions of extremely angry people inside it. Many of them furious at the idea that we shouldn't pollute ourselves to the brink extinction and have mud huts once again become the pinnacle of design.
No because it's about how dramatic changes to our societies caused by technology don't automatically provide benefits immediately which is very on topic when discussing AI, which could change society as much as agriculture or industrialization did (if not more).
What part of that conversation felt not kn topic to you?
I'm not sure which part of me directly responding to comments you made in this thread is off topic either but maybe you just don't like your world view being challenged so succinctly and directly
I'm not sure which part of me directly responding to comments you made in this thread is off topic either but maybe you just don't like your world view being challenged so succinctly and directly
I'd be very glad to answer about what you think is my world view, just not in this thread. I'll answer in other news
I've been wondering how many of you use AI GPT style to research before you post here in politics.
The number of new entry-level UK jobs has dropped by almost a third since the launch of ChatGPT, new figures suggest, as companies use AI to cut back the size of their workforces.
Vacancies for graduate jobs, apprenticeships, internships and junior jobs with no degree requirement have dropped 32% since the launch of the AI chatbot in November 2022, research by the job search site Adzuna released on Monday has found. These entry-level jobs now account for 25% of the market in the UK, down from 28.9% in 2022.
It comes as businesses increasingly use AI as a route to improve efficiency and reduce staff numbers. This month the chief executive of BT, Allison Kirkby, said advances in AI could presage deeper job cuts at the telecoms company, after it outlined plans two years ago to shed between 40,000 and 55,000 workers.
Meanwhile, Dario Amodei, the boss of the $61bn (£44.5bn) AI developer Anthropic, has warned the technology could wipe out half of all entry-level office jobs in the next five years, and push up unemployment by between 10% and 20%.
Wait until they realize they're firing half of their customers as well.
Tragedy of the Corporations: Each corporation acted rationally by cutting labor costs but together, they destroyed the aggregate demand they all depended on. Or something like that.
Once they realize that, we might see some changes. Just as war increases governmental payrolls, putting people to work on our infrastructures - which need a lot of work - seems like the most viable solution to sudden employment shocks of this scale.
Corporations cannot solve this. Any that try might do okay in the verys hort term but will be destroyed by competition who are cheaper faster and more innovative
