I think AI may be the salvation of mankind. The humans in charge don't 'scale' well when their authority expands to billions of people. Humans just can't resist flattening the data and using notions and biases to make decisions that don't fit well.

▲

jayd16 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

LLMs are distilled bias. Its not like they're a classical AI being of pure logic.

	▲	Quartzium an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Not LLMs. They will eventually move to neuromorphic hardware. And I think "pure logic" is somewhat downplaying what it will actually be. I'd use "reason" instead. "Pure logic" sounds sterile and robotic in a sense, implying it would mess up because it's missing that "emotional craziness". But what got us here is reason, not emotional behavior. And you could theoretically add any human aspect that it required to make "good decisions".

▲

tim333 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think it could work quite well if you don't get over ambitious with it. Claude with a publicly available prompt to follow a sensible publicly available and voted on might do better than the orange wonder.

▲

hypercube33 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Oh the Hitchhikers guide is also a good movie. 42

▲

Hikikomori an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Socialism would work under an agi.

▲

Vaushite an hour ago | parent [-]

Who would have trained the AGI, and how do you have worker ownership if an AGI owns everything - is the AGI the worker?

▲

Quartzium 22 minutes ago | parent [-]

Superintelligence won't have the "training" issue as it would be able to see through it all. The bias issue is with LLMs. Super-intelligence would just self-correct any such biases. And we're not there yet, LLMs aren't "super-intelligence". They are some sort of intelligence, sure. But they are not that SI thing that will run things in the future.

	▲	aDyslecticCrow 7 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		You say that with quite an certainty but i don't think there is grounds for that at all. Why would it correct any bias? how would it correct any bias? If data has a bias the analysis has a bias; correcting a bias against the data is itself by definition a bias. "Super intelligence" (whatever we even define that as) will have whatever goals we give it; intentionally or not.

▲

EA-3167 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It’s fascinating to watch the depth of True Belief increase as the obvious signs of impending financial doom increase as well. Reminds me of Festinger’s work with the comet cult, although I suppose the “getting paid to believe” aspect is stronger here.