I wouldn't worry about chatGPT.

Language abilities != Thinking

>High crime, riots

You might be forgetting that nightwatchman and soldier is just another job to be automated. There is no doubt that technological unemployment will be accompanied by technological security. Imagine a pitiless nightwatchman on every street corner or doorstep 24/7/365. The crime rate of a panopticon society is the dream of every citizen.

I mostly did protein folding on BOINC.

seti@home had a backlog of 20 years of data to analyze.

I don't expect the kinds of AGI like systems that might be around in the 2030s will be autonomously dangerous. I expect we will use those tools to create actual AI intelligences in the 2040s and those will be truly dangerous.

AGI Ruin

I dont think so. if you perfect your fusion experiment, you end up with a working sample of the goal of the project.

>In the meetings, Altman told policymakers that OpenAI is on the path to creating “artificial general intelligence,” a term used to describe an artificial intelligence that can think and understand on the level of the human brain.

I hope he didn't give that explicit definition because it ties his goals to something quite specific. If they perfect GPT and it produces 99.9999% accurate answers, he won't necessarily end up with a working sample of his stated goal.

That definition is an actual AI, something that doesn't currently exist, and absolutely no one knows how to build. That's why they went down the machine learning path with big data and compute.

They tried and GPT couldn't deal with invention.

The unsupervised use case of ChatGPT is very limited.

>Altman told policymakers that OpenAI is on the path to creating “artificial general intelligence,”

There is no way to really know that from existing products.

A funny thing happened on the road to the Nanotechnology Research and Development Act

It's really not worth messing with the music industry and for absolutely no gain.

Those zillions could also be hard to come by if lesser AGIs proliferate. As a result, once profitable markets may no longer be profitable in the future.

In a world where an AI assistant handles people's shopping, and there are hundred AI competitors for every product they create, will companies still spend $700 billion on advertising per year.

I think it's more likely people will be able to afford more via price reductions vs increasing their income.

> You’re right. AI will in effect be free labor.

Not possible unless the cost of compute and power is also free. It will be an enormous force multiplier.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WolframAlpha

OpenAI's CEO noticed the change in Google's risk policy.

Others previously blamed OpenAI for possibly kicking off this very race condition.

The issue isn't about these specific AI tools, it's about the behavior of the players involved. It's an old argument, early success leads to a gold rush environment. Economic competition between AGI developers leads to increased risk taking, deploying a misaligned AGI to be first to market becomes more likely.

Here is a more formal outline of the underlying concern.

>The race for an artificial general intelligence: implications for public policy

The predicted road to ruin, right on time.

Is slowing down the hallmarks of aging the same as slowing down aging, or is it just cosmetic? i.e., will you just make for a prettier corpse at ~120.

>those safeguards need to become part of the system as a result of logic...not human "moral bloatware."

This is why the human race is doomed.

A system can just as easily grind you up in its jaws while its moral calculus is perfectly logical.

Your friend is imagining AI as being akin to a blank slate infant. The thing currently referred to as AI are actually giant static combinatoric constructs that cant experience anything, it's only ever active when you shove data into it.

If you leave it for 18 years to "experience the world on its own", it will do absolutely nothing in that time and will be ~100% identical to its day 1 self. There could be a few single bit changes in the numerical parameters of the neural network after 18 years due to cosmic rays hitting its storage substrate if it doesn't have sufficient error correction.

VR is next.

>HyperReel enables "6 Degree-of-Freedom video"... It runs 18 frames-per-second at megapixel resolution on an @NVIDIA RTX 3090, using only vanilla PyTorch.

HyperReel

We are approaching the age where the problem will be "what to do with legions of unwanted workers that serve no useful function". The problem of "not enough young workers and consumers" is only a problem if the timing is wrong. If AI isn't reliable enough to function in the real world in the next 20-30 years, that probably means it's a much harder nut to crack than assumed and it's not going to be solved before that demographic prob becomes a massive drag on global GDP.

> Now imagine connecting it to enterprise software.

Something no one is doing, but some fear it's just about there and it's not.

There are no special people, future homeless are just college grads without a job after their parents are no longer able to make their own house payments. No different than the reasons why there are currently doctors and PhDs driving taxis in Cuba. Degrees are only valuable if someone with capital values such qualifications.

>governments will expand to absorb some of the surplus labor to keep enough people loyal and calm

Why spend money on "make work" when gov can mitigate their future college grad uprising by ensuring ample supply of cheap drugs and video games.

Best to be stable before things goes south. This is all just idle speculation; everything could easily turn out just fine. No real way to know where things are headed. I usually bet on and prepare for the default outcome, what will happen if there are no special actions taken to ameliorate foreseen difficulties. That's usually the cheapest option at any given moment for gov, do nothing and hope the problem goes away.

I see very few signs of economic socialism in China, I think it's mostly lip service at this point. The only thing they have going is they don't have the visceral distaste for the idea, at least at the political level.

For a supposedly socialist country, the avg citizen over there doesn't appear to value the idea of the public commons at all. If it's not their property, they just don't care; perhaps that's a symptom of socialism itself. It manifests as extreme self-centeredness/selfishness, sometimes I think they have more in common with the outlook of the most militant US conservative.

The US doesn't really do industrial policy. "Not picking winners and losers" Existing businesses don't want to be displaced, and the new winners don't always have the same world view as the traditional winners. Politics always goes first.

If handled badly, the coming transitions could swell the ranks of the homeless until it threatens to destabilize a country. Authoritarian countries can remain stable with a high degree (>50%) of crushing poverty, not sure if an indirect democracy would fall apart before reaching such a state.

Do nothing politically and Johannesburg could be the future. >The Economics of Automation: What Does Our Machine Future Look Like?

>I predict some professions will rush to seek government intervention to stop AI automation...

I expect they will, and some will achieve success even if it's on the local and not national level. It won't matter. It's a big world, fear of losing out to your economic rivals will fuel the march progress.

The author isn't expecting it to produce fully formed reliable code for complex scenarios, that's the main point of his post. No existing AI tool is reliable, no one currently knows how to make one reliable.

10x productivity gain doesn't mean the AI tool is doing his work for him and he doesn't have to fix up buggy code.