In the age of Artificial Intelligence, what should be free?

[Alex_Krycek]

With the release of ChatGPT 4 and the development of numerous other generative A.i. platforms, the A.i (re)/(de)volution is clearly upon us.  Mass unemployment is one many potential upheavals A.i. could bring.  

A report from the World Economic Forum in 2021 projected when A.i will take over various sectors:

For me, the structural changes A.i. will bring to practically every sector of the economy demand a fundamental rethinking of how our economy is structured. 

In alignment with the current dialogue catalyzed by Geoffrey Hinton regarding the dangers of A.i. should be a universal discussion on what benefits A.i.  must legally afford human society.  Such a conversation would be akin to the great Re-Awakening that happened after WW2 in terms of universal human rights and ensuring basic standards for as many people as possible.

To cut to the chase, in my view many things that we pay for in society will have to become free in order to make the shift to the brave new world awaiting us.

My "free for everyone" shortlist is the following:

• Basic needs:  food, clothing, and shelter 
• All levels of education (as much as a person wants to learn)
• Transportation 
• Entertainment
• Utilities such as electricity, water, internet, etc

Ultimately the difference between a significantly improved society and a significantly more miserable society rests on our collective decision about what basic rights A.i. should afford each person.

How do you see the economy adjusting to the seismic A.i. disruption that is set to take place?  Should the social safety net be deepened and expanded, or should it be every man / woman for him/herself?

 

Edited May 26, 2023 by Alex_Krycek

[dimreepr]

3 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

For me, the structural changes A.i. will bring to practically every sector of the economy demand a fundamental rethinking of how our economy is structured. 

Absolutely, but the problem remains the same; follow the money, is a hard habit to break...

 

3 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

For me, the structural changes A.i. will bring to practically every sector of the economy demand a fundamental rethinking of how our economy is structured. 

Absolutely, but the problem remains the same; follow the money, is a hard habit to break...

 

3 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

How do you see the economy adjusting to the seismic A.i. disruption that is set to take place?  Should the social safety net be deepened and expanded, or should it be every man / woman for him/herself?

We're to early in the cycle to make any realistic prediction's, AI is just a child ATM, and we all know the problems a precocious child can present (just watch"The Big Bang Theory")...

 

[Intoscience]

3 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Ultimately the difference between a significantly improved society and a significantly more miserable society rests on our collective decision about what basic rights A.i. should afford each person.

How do you see the economy adjusting to the seismic A.i. disruption that is set to take place?  Should the social safety net be deepened and expanded, or should it be every man / woman for him/herself?

I think its an inevitable part of human evolution. The sensible and most likely approach would be slow integration. A.I should be an asset rather than a threat, both economically and socially. We have witnessed in our life times changes through technology, the introduction of the internet being one major example. then you can look at robots in manufacturing and other industries. The goal should be to free the world of poverty, reduce sickness and improve wellbeing for all. Reality, most likely, someone (maybe even A.I) will just get stinking rich/powerful and the poor will continue to be poor. 

I would support the following as priority

• Basic needs:  food, clothing, and shelter
• Reduction in diseases and ill health 
• Utilities such as electricity, water, internet, etc
• All levels of education (as much as a person wants to learn

Edited May 26, 2023 by Intoscience

[swansont]

3 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Mass unemployment is one many potential upheavals A.i. could bring.  

What specific jobs are in danger from a language algorithm? So-called AI interpolates from what it’s trained on. It does not innovate.

How is this different from the “automation will take all our jobs” cry that we’ve heard for decades now, and has fallen well short of the forecasted doom?

[dimreepr]

4 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

The sensible and most likely approach would be slow integration. A.I should be an asset rather than a threat, both economically and socially. We have witnessed in our life times changes through technology, the introduction of the internet being one major example. then you can look at robots in manufacturing and other industries.

Every Yin has its Yang; for example, every step change in technology, so far, has taken us closer to the cliff, while simultaneously giving us a glimpse of the potentially magnificent view.

4 minutes ago, swansont said:

How is this different from the “automation will take all our jobs” cry that we’ve heard for decades now, and has fallen well short of the forecasted doom?

There is a school of thought that suggests AI will create a U shaped graph, in which, as AI develops, there is a point where the number of job's will start to travel towards zero exponentially. I'll have to do a little digging to give you a citation, but I know there is one. 

[Genady]

Everything should be free. What does cut off the list?

[dimreepr]

4 minutes ago, Genady said:

Everything should be free. What does cut off the list?

Free of what?

[Genady]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Free of what?

Ask OP. They said it in the topic.

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, Genady said:

Ask OP. They said it in the topic.

Not every topic is a joke.

[Genady]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Not every topic is a joke.

Not every topic is a joke.

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, Genady said:

Not every topic is a joke.

Grow up.

[Genady]

Just now, dimreepr said:

Grow up.

Rito.

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, Genady said:

Rito.

If this is you trolling me, I'm just going to cross the bridge.

 

[Genady]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

If this is you trolling me, I'm just going to cross the bridge.

 

Just go ahead.

[dimreepr]

 

Oh FFS, now I'm going to have to watch it again... 🙄

[Endy0816]

10 minutes ago, swansont said:

What specific jobs are in danger from a language algorithm? So-called AI interpolates from what it’s trained on. It does not innovate.

How is this different from the “automation will take all our jobs” cry that we’ve heard for decades now, and has fallen well short of the forecasted doom?

Probably any job that involves content production.

Big thing is that you can chain them together. For example, a language model feeding inputs to AI's that can provide images and/or video from that text.

With some prompts it could produce an entire movie, ad campaign, tv series, etc. May not be the next great masterwork, but the cost will be next to nothing.

Will probably still need human editors/producers, but they could do the work of a small army.

It's like we all suddenly have Asimov's book writing robot.

 

[Genady]

44 minutes ago, swansont said:

What specific jobs are in danger from a language algorithm? So-called AI interpolates from what it’s trained on. It does not innovate.

How is this different from the “automation will take all our jobs” cry that we’ve heard for decades now, and has fallen well short of the forecasted doom?

I cannot speak of the jobs I'm not familiar with, but as I look back on the jobs I've been ever involved with, NONE of them would've been in danger from the ChatGPT and alike. 

[iNow]

1 hour ago, Endy0816 said:

Probably any job that involves content production.

It's unlikely to eliminate that job, just change it. Someone must prompt the model with topics and general framing of the subject first.

Lots of blacksmith jobs were lost with the invention of the automobile, but far more new jobs were created...

The AI is a bit like eye-glasses for the human mind. It's going to focus things, but not necessarily destroy. Time will tell. 

[Alex_Krycek]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

It's unlikely to eliminate that job, just change it. Someone must prompt the model with topics and general framing of the subject first.

IMO content creation jobs won't be that hard hit.  Why?  Generating content en masse isn't likely to translate into compelling storytelling.  

I can see skilled human creators becoming even more valuable than they are now, thanks to the tsunami of tripe that A.i. will inevitably unleash.

[swansont]

9 hours ago, Endy0816 said:

Probably any job that involves content production.

Big thing is that you can chain them together. For example, a language model feeding inputs to AI's that can provide images and/or video from that text.

With some prompts it could produce an entire movie, ad campaign, tv series, etc. May not be the next great masterwork, but the cost will be next to nothing.

Will probably still need human editors/producers, but they could do the work of a small army.

It's like we all suddenly have Asimov's book writing robot.

 

But it’s just going to be a re-hash of what already exists. And right now, from examples I’ve seen, not very good. Hollywood does the re-hash already, but I think people will get sick of it.

[StringJunky]

2 hours ago, swansont said:

But it’s just going to be a re-hash of what already exists. And right now, from examples I’ve seen, not very good. Hollywood does the re-hash already, but I think people will get sick of it.

I imagine there will be a longish  gimmick phase to start: "Ooh look what I can get it to do or say." I think it's going to look very fake for a decade or two, then people will stop analysing it... then the shit starts because there will be less people looking over the shoulders of the AI programmers... whatever they are called. The next big social upheaval  will be humans demanding  that their AI love-interest be recognised in a civil union. Hopefully, I will be deceased.

[dimreepr]

On 5/26/2023 at 12:31 PM, dimreepr said:

There is a school of thought that suggests AI will create a U shaped graph, in which, as AI develops, there is a point where the number of job's will start to travel towards zero exponentially. I'll have to do a little digging to give you a citation, but I know there is one. 

James Bessen

Quote

Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies will automate many jobs, but the effect on employment is not obvious. In manufacturing, technology has sharply reduced jobs in recent decades. But before that, for over a century, employment grew, even in industries experiencing rapid technological change. What changed? Demand was highly elastic at first and then became inelastic. The effect of artificial intelligence on jobs will similarly depend critically on the nature of demand. This paper presents a simple model of demand that accurately predicts the rise and fall of employment in the textile, steel and automotive industries. This model provides a useful framework for exploring how AI is likely to affect jobs over the next 10 or 20 years.

AI and Jobs: the role of demand (nber.org)

[Endy0816]

On 5/26/2023 at 6:05 PM, swansont said:

But it’s just going to be a re-hash of what already exists. And right now, from examples I’ve seen, not very good. Hollywood does the re-hash already, but I think people will get sick of it.

The jobs surrounding formulaic productions are what I think will be most impacted.

Actors, writers, crew, staff, any strictly report writing positions, some artists.

 

Granted can generate more novel results too if you change major elements or give it more material and a unique prompt to start with.

 

 

[Airbrush]

Evil people can ask AI how to assassinate someone, make a dirty bomb, or commit the most heinous crimes. Maybe that is where controls kick in restrict freedom to do evil.

Edited July 18, 2023 by Airbrush

[swansont]

4 hours ago, Airbrush said:

Evil people can ask AI how to assassinate someone, make a dirty bomb, or commit the most heinous crimes. Maybe that is where controls kick in restrict freedom to do evil.

AI, which is not actually intelligence, is not in a position to provide new information. If you want to do these things, the information that AI would use is already out there.