There is a huge group of people who just have irreconcilable differences in worldview that will be antagonistic towards AI and robotics. What I think will happen is a fragmentation of territories and online subcultures where there are a range of laws and tolerance or acceptance of AI and robots.
Actually this is probably going to divide the population even more than the false left/right dichotomy.
Eventually there will be what is essentially a new species of transhuman with high bandwidth brain-computer interfaces to AIs 2-10 times more powerful deeply integrated into their cognition. They will have to accommodate the luddites with what will essentially be people zoos.
Gradually the transhuman will also need to be cordoned off. It's likely post-humans will leave earth or go underground.
But this article is the beginning of all of that. He doesn't understand, doesn't have the background to understand and is not interested. Rather than trying to go to battle with these groups, it's best to find places for them to stay and do things their own way without interfering with advancing civilization.
It is bullshit generator, but that's what A LOT of people are paid to do in modern economy.
As for the class war arguments - we'll soon reach peak population worldwide, and in the developed world we're past peak working age population already. Soon we'll enter peak retirement and then it'll all go downhill.
Class war in a world that has shrinking populations will probably look very different from the usual, if it'll even be possible at all.
> It is bullshit generator, but that's what A LOT of people are paid to do in modern economy.
Precaritise was a word to learn. OP used it a few times and it is a capsule summary of his prognosis. Recommend Foucault's treatment of control to understand the significant difference between ad-hoc bs-ing and systemic and centralized mechanized bs-ing. That said, frankly the distinction should be obvious.
> will probably look very different from the usual
I thought this was a fair attempt at giving us a hypothetical looksee:
To generalize that, consider this social model: As the power classes globalize, a form of auto-colonization will occur, mirroring the technological power imbalance between colonizers and the colonized.
BS jobs were a consequence of peak productivity+cultural insistence on working 8 hours a day 5 days a week. They will go away, doesn't matter if it's AI or demographic collapse that kills them first.
Class warfare assumes you have lots of demand and lots of potential productivity and the bottleneck is the capital. It's a consequence of eternal population growth assumption that's simply not true anymore. If you ignore that all your conclusions will be false. Demography matters.
Our future will be labor- and demand-constrained, not capital-constrained. It will have more in common with the world after Black Death, than with the industrial revolution.
Marxism is as relevant today as Malthusian trap = not at all.
> As the power classes globalize
Why would they? We're deglobalizing pretty quickly for the last few years and it's going to accelerate.
So I used ChatGPT yesterday at length for the first time. I was asking open ended questions like...how can I use my new server to help my studies in cyber security. After 6 question and answer's I actually got some pretty useful, actionable ideas. Now given there's admittedly randomness there but as a tool to give your general idea's some substance I found it useful.
After you use it a bit longer, you'll get both good answers and also some strangely bad answers given with a totally straight face.
I just asked now ChatGPT to give me a reference on interpreters and compilers, and then I refined the question to specify Python. The first answer gave me the "Dragon Book". The second answer invented two books. The funny thing is that the authors of the two imaginary books are actual people.
Q: do you know of any reference for interpreters and compilers that uses Python ?
A: Yes, "Python Compiler and Interpreter Fundamentals" by Arun Tigeraniya is a good reference for learning about interpreters and compilers using Python. This book provides an introduction to the basics of compilers and interpreters, and covers topics such as lexical analysis, parsing, semantic analysis, code generation, and optimization, using Python code examples.
Another resource is "Writing a Compiler in Python" by Sridhar Ratnakumar, which is an in-depth tutorial that guides you through the process of writing a simple compiler in Python, starting with a lexer, moving on to a parser, and finally producing the output code.
Both of these resources provide a good introduction to the subject and should be a helpful starting point for anyone interested in learning about compilers and interpreters using Python.
Really? What about question answering in line in google searches, chat gpt, that chrome extension demo that can navigate web pages. Is the idea that these aren’t novel?
They're neat, but they're old. And frankly, they don't illustrate enough of an opportunity to build a product off of. Worst of all, they're not nearly dependable enough to provide any guarantee for. At best, you're building on a lie generator, which is only useful insofar as fooling the user is concerned.
I honestly think the last 3 years have been more exciting for compute hardware than AI software, which is really saying something in a post-Moore's-law world.
I think they're only old in that there were terrible version of all that tech in the distant past, but now chat gpt is actually practically useful to me fairly often, machine translation is a bit older but has gotten much better. It's a bit like you looked at google search and went, well yahoo already exists this isn't actually new.
There is a huge group of people who just have irreconcilable differences in worldview that will be antagonistic towards AI and robotics. What I think will happen is a fragmentation of territories and online subcultures where there are a range of laws and tolerance or acceptance of AI and robots.
Actually this is probably going to divide the population even more than the false left/right dichotomy.
Eventually there will be what is essentially a new species of transhuman with high bandwidth brain-computer interfaces to AIs 2-10 times more powerful deeply integrated into their cognition. They will have to accommodate the luddites with what will essentially be people zoos.
Gradually the transhuman will also need to be cordoned off. It's likely post-humans will leave earth or go underground.
But this article is the beginning of all of that. He doesn't understand, doesn't have the background to understand and is not interested. Rather than trying to go to battle with these groups, it's best to find places for them to stay and do things their own way without interfering with advancing civilization.
> Eventually there will be what is essentially a new species of transhuman
Yes, they will call themselves the Borg. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
Who would want to go back to being merely human when the inhuman part is immortal and nearly omniscient?
What kind of transhumans would intentionally de-optimize themselves for mere nostalgia?
The vestigial human component can be thrown away and replaced every few years, or eliminated entirely for cost, efficiency, and aesthetic reasons.
If the alternative is an eternity of ChatGPT-synthesized consciousness, I'll take a clean mortal death any day of the week.
Do you really want to live forever? (serious question)
It is bullshit generator, but that's what A LOT of people are paid to do in modern economy.
As for the class war arguments - we'll soon reach peak population worldwide, and in the developed world we're past peak working age population already. Soon we'll enter peak retirement and then it'll all go downhill.
Class war in a world that has shrinking populations will probably look very different from the usual, if it'll even be possible at all.
> It is bullshit generator, but that's what A LOT of people are paid to do in modern economy.
Precaritise was a word to learn. OP used it a few times and it is a capsule summary of his prognosis. Recommend Foucault's treatment of control to understand the significant difference between ad-hoc bs-ing and systemic and centralized mechanized bs-ing. That said, frankly the distinction should be obvious.
> will probably look very different from the usual
I thought this was a fair attempt at giving us a hypothetical looksee:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535108
To generalize that, consider this social model: As the power classes globalize, a form of auto-colonization will occur, mirroring the technological power imbalance between colonizers and the colonized.
BS jobs were a consequence of peak productivity+cultural insistence on working 8 hours a day 5 days a week. They will go away, doesn't matter if it's AI or demographic collapse that kills them first.
Class warfare assumes you have lots of demand and lots of potential productivity and the bottleneck is the capital. It's a consequence of eternal population growth assumption that's simply not true anymore. If you ignore that all your conclusions will be false. Demography matters.
Our future will be labor- and demand-constrained, not capital-constrained. It will have more in common with the world after Black Death, than with the industrial revolution.
Marxism is as relevant today as Malthusian trap = not at all.
> As the power classes globalize
Why would they? We're deglobalizing pretty quickly for the last few years and it's going to accelerate.
> It is bullshit generator,
I prefer to use the term 'Bovine Scatologist'
So I used ChatGPT yesterday at length for the first time. I was asking open ended questions like...how can I use my new server to help my studies in cyber security. After 6 question and answer's I actually got some pretty useful, actionable ideas. Now given there's admittedly randomness there but as a tool to give your general idea's some substance I found it useful.
After you use it a bit longer, you'll get both good answers and also some strangely bad answers given with a totally straight face.
I just asked now ChatGPT to give me a reference on interpreters and compilers, and then I refined the question to specify Python. The first answer gave me the "Dragon Book". The second answer invented two books. The funny thing is that the authors of the two imaginary books are actual people.
You can criticize LLMs all you want, they will still be a huge thing in our economy and civilization.
Maybe so. That being said, it's been 3 years since Text to Transformer was released and... we still don't have any novel applications.
I'll take my chances.
Really? What about question answering in line in google searches, chat gpt, that chrome extension demo that can navigate web pages. Is the idea that these aren’t novel?
They're neat, but they're old. And frankly, they don't illustrate enough of an opportunity to build a product off of. Worst of all, they're not nearly dependable enough to provide any guarantee for. At best, you're building on a lie generator, which is only useful insofar as fooling the user is concerned.
I honestly think the last 3 years have been more exciting for compute hardware than AI software, which is really saying something in a post-Moore's-law world.
I think they're only old in that there were terrible version of all that tech in the distant past, but now chat gpt is actually practically useful to me fairly often, machine translation is a bit older but has gotten much better. It's a bit like you looked at google search and went, well yahoo already exists this isn't actually new.
I guess we'll just have to see
You have to know what to ask it.