> Throughout this process society becomes wealthier, TVs get cheaper, we colonize Mars, etc. The force that keeps this going is human insatisfaction: once we get these things we’ll want whatever it is we don’t have.

What makes you think the machines will both be smarter and better than us but also be our slaves to make human society better.

Is equine society better now than before they started working with humans?

(Personally I believe AGI is just hype and nobody knows how anyone could build it and we will never do, so I’m not worried about that facet of thinking machine tech.)

▲

jrvarela56 4 days ago | parent [-]

The machine doesn’t suffer if you ask it to do things 24/7. In that sense, they are not slaves.

As to why they’d do what we ask them to, the only reason they do anything is because some human made a request. In this long chain there will obv be machine to machine requests, but in the aggregate it’s like the economy right now but way more automated.

Whenever I see arguments about AI changing society, I just replace AI with ‘the market’ or ‘capitalism’. We’re just speeding up a process that started a while ago, maybe with the industrial revolution?

I’m not saying this isn’t bad in some ways, but it’s the kind of bad we’ve been struggling with for decades due to misaligned incentives (global warming, inequality, obesity, etc).

What I’m saying is that AI isn’t creating new problems. It’s just speeding up society.

▲

fmbb 4 days ago | parent [-]

Does that mean you just don’t believe we will make AGI, or it will arrive but then stop and never evolve past humans?

That’s not what the AI developers profess to believe, or the investors.

	▲	jrvarela56 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		The problem is that the term itself is not clearly defined. Then, we discuss 'what will it do once it arrives' so all bets are off. You're right that I probably disagree as to what AGI is and what it will do once "we're in the way". My assumption is that we'll be replaced just like labor is replaced now, just faster. The difference between humans and the equine population is that we humans come up with stuff we 'need' and 'the market' comes up with products/services to satisfy that need. The problem with inequality is that the market doesn't pay much attention to needs of poor people vs rich people. If most of humanity becomes part of the 'have nots' then we'll depend on the 0.1%-ers to redistribute.