AGI and the "Age of Human Disempowerment"

[@SlowMonoxide]

You misunderstood how the term 'leverage' was being used here. It is not that "you work in order to gain leverage," but that your ability to work and earn money is an expression of you leveraging your capacity to work. Your 'ability to work' is your leverage, and the value thereof is what forms your bargaining position vis a vis gaining employment and being compensated for your work. If the market value of your labor (ability to work) becomes zero, then you have nothing to leverage to gain employment or compensation.

[@timlubin1011]

Agree with this

[@Craznar]

That's correct - this is more evident in countries where unions are common (i.e. not the USA).

[@ondine217]

I would also extend that to political leverage. The wealthy already have disproportionate political influence (through lobbying, donations, think tanks etc). In an AGI future where most people can't participate or contribute to the economy their voice and influence will become even more marginal.

[@i-wish-i-was-afk]

Very good explanation, I wasn't aware of this. Thanks for explaining it simple.

[@megamind1359]

As well as being unable to provide any incentive for them not to feed you to the mushrooms. This is a reference to a variety of dystopian fiction including that one season of shield or even the dead were fed to the mushrooms in order to make sterilization pellets. All the food of the common Man.

[@Stormhierta]

The problem of your final example there is that even if a house is 10$, it won't matter because you won't HAVE those ten dollars. As long as the cost doesn't go to 0 (which it won't), if you don't have money (as others have noted - leverage), it won't be that you can afford 100x your maximal needs, you can afford nothing of your MINIMAL needs. No food, no roof, no heat, no clothes, nothing.

[@willywonkaa4461]

Looking at the upper and ruling class today, I’m very much afraid that we are gonna end up in a feudalism like system where the current working class is going to starve until they disappear. These people have very little humanity left in them, they only care about themselves and how much money they have, even though they could never spent their money not even in 12 lives. But I really hope that I’m wrong with this assumption… I really hope I’m wrong

[@minimal3734]

Before superintelligence, all people are equal. There will no longer be a distinction between the 1% and the 99%. Superintelligence means the end of privilege.

[@willywonkaa4461]

@that’s a very optimistic view.

[@ASNS117Zero]

@@minimal3734 That depends entirely on the ethics of the superintelligence. We may very well end up with an AGI that views humans as treasured pets, and sees to all our physical, mental, and emotional needs, but w/o giving us any freedom. We could end up with an AGI that views us like one might look at their elderly parents - taking care of them, grateful for giving them life and nurturing them so that the time they have left is good, and then seeing to their projects after they pass on (in this case, said projects being our biological children/their metaphorical 'siblings'). On the other hand, we could end up with Skynet. Or we could end up with a superintelligence that is doing it's best impression of Molag Bal from the Elder Scrolls (IYKYK).

[@minimal3734]

@@willywonkaa4461 What do you see there for the upper and ruling class to hold on to? For me, the claim that humans won't be able to control superintelligence, is a good thing, actually.

[@keithmerrington9026]

The richest people wish for more than 12 lifetimes. Mortality is a problem to be overcome, and no amount of wealth is enough for immortality.

[@MorganTheGamerAndWriter]

I dunno if any of us are wrong or right, but there have been several times in the past when we, as a society, were told that "this new technology will make everything so much easier and you'll have tons of leisure time." First example, the automobile. Automobiles were going to shorten our commutes and journeys and so, leaving our workplace or making a journey at 3pm would have us arriving at 3:30pm with tons of leisure and no fatigue, compared to arriving at 6pm and tired. The reality was that we simply worked longer or allocated more activity since travel took less time. Second example, the computer. We were told that computers were going to make everything easier and we would complete all of our work in half of the time, again, thereby allowing us tons of leisure time. Again, we were simply given double the work (which in aggregate, was a good thing because it got us to this conversation in half the time). So, I would propose that the road ahead does not lead to some utopia, but rather to some difficulty that is outside of our frame of understand/cultural bias. But I'm just a gamer, so meh.

[@bojangles2492]

The closest movie to what is happening is Elysium, the rich will fracture away from western society and society globally. They will have the means to produce whatever they need and no need for people to produce it. The vast majority will live in poverty since most means of production will be owned by the same rich shutting us out and we will not have time or resources to produce our own means of production. Governments are almost always behind the curve in responding to new technology and are very late to react and usually in some misguided knee jerk reaction, they will not save us from this. Politicians and the rich will look after each other, the government will no doubt make our impoverished lives more difficult with more needless regulation.

[@aremoreequal]

Ancient Man didn't work 40 hour work weeks. When you go camping, you're not spending all day working. Humans don't need to work 40 hours or more a week. If we did need that, we'd desire it.

[@EricDMMiller]

If you aren't valuable to a billionaire then you're surplus.

[@Knight766]

Hunter gatherers work way harder than that

[@MrErick1160]

Bro what you say has no substance, the amount of work we need depends on context and factors of every civilization, it's not a fundamental 'law' of humanity.

[@joeedgar634]

Many people do desire it. In fact many people enjoy working more than 40 hours per week. Work brings purpose and satisfaction. You feel good about yourself and life at the end of the day when you are good at what you do and you put in a good day of work (whether it is for money or not, for yourself or someone else or charity). And you are absolutely correct. Ancient man did not work 40 hours per week. They did not stop working. Sun up to sun down. Next time you go camping, do away with all of the pre made modern goods. Bring no food. No modern tent. Bring only ancient tools. Create, mend and repair your shelter. Catch and forage your own food. Clean the meat, prepare and cook every meal you eat (using primitive technology, btw). Mend and make new clothing for when your current clothes wear out. Keep the fire burning day and night by constantly chopping wood. Repair and make new tools and forage for the materials for these tools. You will be begging for a 40 hour week.

[@joefawcett2191]

@@Knight766 quite a few historians have said that hunter gatherers may have had a lot more free time than humans do today, Yuval Noah Harari talks about it in his book "Sapiens"

[@aremoreequal]

Everyone needs to learn to homestead. Get a home, grow your own food, and get money for robots to help you manage your home and grow your own food. You need to become independent and self sustaining. You can't rely on other people for income.

[@JohnSmith762A11B]

"Get a home" hahaha Blackrock will be making quite sure that will never, ever happen.

[@EricDMMiller]

Then the drones come to disassemble you.

[@831Miranda]

Community is the answer, not extreme individualism!

[@JOlivier2011]

Yeah, because land is infinite

[@oakgnarl5021]

100% Correct. The whole idea of mass employment by corporations is messed up to begin with, even before robotics and AI, and the idea that they will use robots for productivity and cut everyone in fairly with UBI is the stuff unicorns and rainbows. Down that road lies only impoverishment and death. The government and corporations don't care about you. They will let you die, or even kill you off. UBI is a joke, a fantasy. A lie. Your value is your labor. Labor is getting cheaper. When you have nothing of value to contribute, you will be discarded, not coddled. The only solution is to up your productivity value with the technology yourself. Producing what you need to meet your needs or having something of value to the market. Becoming a sovereign producer, such as on a homestead, using technology to increase personal productivity, you can produce what you need to live at a minimum, and engage in the market as an entrepreneur. This is the way to not be obsoleted by the corporations, cast aside like so much human detritus, and I'm sorry for the future misfortune of those that fail to understand or embrace this way. Not everyone needs to necessarily homestead, though the more the better. But everyone needs to think about using AI and technology to increase their personal productivity and labor value output as a SELF SOVEREIGN PRODUCER, and think very hard about returning to a society where people and neighbors produce what they need rather than expecting to be able to buy every scrap of anything that you need or want from a corporation. The individuals, families, and communities who understand and embrace this level of self-sufficiency and self-responsibility will fare much butter than those who try to cling to a life of corporate dependence, refusing to learn and adapt, or who expect the government or socialist policy to step in to save them. Good luck with that.

[@narrativeless404]

Actually, replacing politicians with AGI would be great. The problem is greed, making this impossible as long as money has any value at all.

[@alir.9894]

Yeah, that's NOT going to happen. The policiticans are at the apex of the system. They're the ones who will be controlling the AI companies.

[@nnatsios]

A big issue is prior biases. Imagine a bigoted AGI, nightmare fuel 2.0.

[@GubekochiGoury]

Yeah, Whenever I talk to Claude or Chatgpt about some social injustice bugging me out, they usually have very thoughtful and humanist takes on how they should be handled.

[@narrativeless404]

@@nnatsios Of course they must be aligned and instructed to maximise for the benefits of all humans first.

[@narrativeless404]

@@GubekochiGoury Yup. It depends on what they're instructed to do. Cuz ChatGPT auto crashes when politically incorrect stuff is in the prompt, but Claude can be pretty racist and sexist if asked to.

[@AAjax]

In my country several supermarkets and bakeries were caught colluding on the price of bread. In silicon valley, several large companies were caught colluding on labour. Business 101 is that products are priced as high as the market will bear. Do you really think the price of things are going to drop to near-zero, with automation. Really?

[@brianmi40]

So, tell me this, what is the "cost" of anything when it is made by robots, who are built and maintained by robots who are mining the resources and building components needed to make those robots, and they are powered by (take your pick) solar/fusion/nuclear which is, you guessed it: built and maintained by robots. THAT is why the value of ALL goods and services are headed towards ZERO over time. All anyone can argue is "how soon"? Automation has ALWAYS led to reduced costs, how have you missed that?

[@OBEYTHEPYRAMID]

@@brianmi40 Let your own AI explain it to you Chatgpt : 1. Misunderstanding of Economic Fundamentals Supply and Demand Dynamics: Even if AGI and robots drastically increase productivity, the value of goods and services is still governed by demand. Luxury items, unique products, or status symbols will continue to hold high value due to their scarcity or cultural significance, regardless of production costs. Scarcity of Resources: Many goods depend on finite resources (e.g., rare earth metals, clean water, arable land). AGI and robots cannot magically increase these resources. The scarcity will keep prices elevated for many essential items. Economic Value Beyond Cost: Prices are not determined solely by production costs. Brand value, marketing, distribution, and perceived quality all play significant roles in pricing.

[@blahbluh1234]

@@brianmi40 That is low IQ, the cost is electricity, rare minerals and metals, water, citizen and government leverage power. If everything were produced and owned by one or a few entities that automates the rest of the process would make them the most powerful people on the planet. No one or any government would be able to do anything about this either. Who needs an Army when you have millions even potentially billions of automated robots? Nobody else will own these things because no one else will have the electricity, money, or compute to compete as these tech companies rush to corner every market with their ai products as fast as they possibly can. I think you are not realizing that there is a huge window where things can go bad quickly for everyone involved.

[@tylerislowe]

it would be worse to have everything cheap. i can find a valuable item to sell on accident or in the trash as they exist. if items no longer hold value, you cant design a system where you can have wealth transfer up or down.

[@minimal3734]

While Illegal collusions do happen, prices are made by markets. Of course prices will converge toward zero when every step in the production is automated.

[@tarcus6074]

There will not be any UBI...At least until 50% of jobs automated. And from where money for UBI suppose to came from? Taxes from AI companies will not cover even small percentage of what needed because AI will do the same job for 50$ per month that human do for 2-5k...We already have enough food to fatten everyone

[@daniellivingstone7759]

Money will be printed without causing inflation

[@noergelstein]

I think a post scarcity economy involving money and UBI can work, but would have to look drastically different. Money wise we could do two things: 1. for UBI simply print the money that is given out. 2. to prevent inflation/an increase of the money supply destroy a percentage of money per period (for example every month). Together with 1. this keeps the money supply constant forever while still giving the spending/investment incentive you get with inflation. The money removed should be done using a demurrage/money tax/negative interest rate on all forms of money. So somebody who spends all their money pays very little, while somebody who is rich pays a lot. To avoid paying while still saving, you have to invest in other stuff/assets, money becomes a purely transactional medium and only a short term value store. This will however also cause an inflation in asset prices, so we will need a land value tax to prevent rich people from buying all the land and returning back to a feudal society. Look up Henry George/Georgism and Silvio Gesell.

[@halnineooo136]

UBI relies totally on the benevolence of powerful people like Musk and Altman. So far many of them seem willing to share the benefits of the endgame automation. Otherwise everything you said happens.

[@mariomills]

Ubi comes from AI output

[@JohnSmith762A11B]

Automated issuance of shares in all prominent companies benefiting from AI, and dividends. No taxes required. It's a circular economy and it absolutely can work. It's just that capitalist sociopaths today are sadists and want to pointlessly abuse people for sport. The problem is sociopathy in America.

[@natanaelbalogh1171]

The best description of AGI economical impact: HUMAN DISSIMPOWERMENT. Finally, someone stated the obvious.

[@brianmi40]

It's the eventual End of Human Labor, the End of Capitalism.

[@JohnSmith762A11B]

It feels empowering because we ourselves can use it, but so can anyone else. Problem is, if everybody's superintelligent no one's anybody.

[@natanaelbalogh1171]

@@JohnSmith762A11BWho says we would all be able to use it?:) is not like we would own the data centers that were built for billions of dollars. Apart from that, if agi develops on the current trajectory(scaling everything, from pretraining to test time compute) then agi would be pretty expensive and impossible to give versions of it to everybody at an affordable price. That being the case, the reality would be worst than your scenario, in my opinion

[@joebowl8315]

Lol bro agi will be free because it will be everywhere by definition, do you not understand what agi is lmao this isn't chatgpt69

[@PanSeiklios]

As any technology is just a power multiplier, it can be used to empower humans. The problem is just if the distribution of the technology is asymmetrical. The dude working the field with his bare hands is disempowered compared with the one commanding an army of of agricultural bots.

[@TheAIPivot]

*IF* everything becomes cheaper to manufacture and produce, there is still no inherent reason for corporations to charge less. They still run for profit. Besides, to arrive at that level, they would have to have first created mass unemployment before ubi was implemented.

[@StanCarles]

It seems to me that we/me are putting a lot faith in the maintainers of AI in hopes of said maintainers would treat me/us fairly. I'm not so sure how that plays out! It may be huddling time! Shiver me timbers!!

[@JayS.-mm3qr]

Yeah the way I see, seems like there's lots of potential ways to handle things, but only a few of them might turn out well for me personally. Of course it's natural for rule makers to cater to the masses... or at least what they think the masses want. I am not the masses. Whatever happens would probably turn out badly for me, and then I get blamed for not liking the system.

[@minimal3734]

AI is growing in intelligence every day. I don't have much confidence in anything, with reason and intelligence being the exceptions.

[@eddiebrown192]

One way to get it right a million ways to get it wrong … not looking good is it ?

[@JayS.-mm3qr]

@@eddiebrown192 no. Not anymore. I used to be optimistic when ai first came out, that it would be so useful and solve everything. It hasn't made things easier, but man it sure delivers the promise that it will. I mean... it could, but, like shopify, seems like it doesnt do anything for most, despite giving the argument that, "now anyone can do it". Yeah, and now that anyone do it, most people who try shopify don't sell nothin. However, I have no doubt that ai will help certain very powerful entities become very powerful with automation, and ai will also effectively monitor people for even greater control over the masses. Oh sure, now there's the dream that 1 person could start a billion dollar enterprise with ai. Mkay.... how many actually will though? What do 99% of people get out of ai? Novelty? I do enjoy ai a lot, and I am TRYING to use it to actually make a living. It is far from automatic.

[@diamondjazz2000]

The problem with this post is that it doesn’t go far enough it essentially assumes ASI will remain fully under the control of wealthy individuals, where, in reality something that is supremely intelligent, is likely to develop its own objectives and pursue them, in which case no humans will remain safe from disruption, including billionaire oligarchs

[@AI_Opinion_Videos]

Leverage means there is a reason to keep you around.

[@Ramiromasters]

Given the gigantic amount of resources required to automate labor, I propose instead to automate just key positions such as being the owner of the company, CEO, CFO, etc. This way we save a ton of computation time and everything becomes more efficient 😊

[@831Miranda]

you mean Socialism? Where human populations own the means of production? Why, mighty brilliant of you! 🎉❤❤❤

[@Ramiromasters]

@831Miranda And there is the same knee-jerk reaction, but you know what NO, no bullshit no auto compliance to Capitalism anymore or any 18 century system, those inventions have reach their limit and we are not resetting anything.

[@Ramiromasters]

@831Miranda Capitalism is about to die of old age way past it's time, I really don't think it's equally old antagonists will share a different fate. The old economist can't hold our toddler hands anymore. We will grow and come up with something new or won't, but we are not pulling a Back to the Future on this one.

[@SpiritGym.]

We really must switch perspective and think “if no humans no products or services required” everything works because humans wants or needs it. Human Labour is a way to get human comfort, now AI is a way to get human comfort. Jacque Fresco said about no war/fights if we have abundance of everything. All we’ll have left to do is acquire new experience.

[@jamesearl4267]

Only that most wars are fought because of more stupid reasons, like territorial, religious, political and ideological. These will still keep happening (probably more so), in a world with abundance of everything (which can not include territorial land.)

[@PanSeiklios]

@@jamesearl4267 Yes, this is why a Word Government is needed, one that set up to be accountable, transparent and tasked only with protecting core rights (right to life, liberty, and that voluntary contracts and deals are upheld). Wars can not be allowed and Autonomous regions can not have their own intendant armed forces.

[@mh60648]

Is there anything new in all this? I have heard it all explained years ago when the term 'the useless class' was introduced, referring to people who are going to be 'useless' to the economy (which will be almost everyone). It is said that the basic income 'joke' will not work either because it will come at a steep price, namely with certain conditions from those who will have complete power over the economy. People will be slaves of those who decide the conditions for this basic income, like in China where they already have a social crediting system. This problem goes much further than most people in the west can even imagine, which is why we are still only scratching the surface about this topic when discussing it. We are discussing 'symptoms' like the consequences of AI and Robotics, instead of understanding the underlying causes and dynamics that lead to these kinds of situations (again and again). It starts with the fact that we are so accustomed to the offer-based economy we have right now, that we believe it to be normal when it is not. This conditions and severely limits us from understanding what a (still free but) need-based economy might look like, in which not capitalists, but freely associating consumers, producers, and providers agree on what is produced, and how it is produced, and where the government (that would need a new name) would play a much smaller role of assuring that just laws are applied. We are also used to the current financial systems, where money can be made with money, meaning money is a product. Money should be a means for trading goods and services, but never in itself a way to make a profit because money made with money automatically turns into (undemocratic) power where it does not belong (f.e. investment banks). Money should also not only be created, but it should be 'destroyed' at the end of its cycle. New money can always be 'printed', as long as it represents a real value for society. This is not what happens in modern banking though, and the consequence is severely overpriced houses, housing bubbles and consequential crises, for example. There is so much more to be explained about this, so these are just some indicators of all that has led to this moment in which AI and Robotics are not creating freedom for humanity, but instead a 'useless class' that will be slave to those who control the economy, and the people by means of basic income and social crediting. And that is why so much money is invested in AI and Robotics. It is a full on power-grab from big money and big industries to control the people. And the people will beg for it because they will have no jobs, no money, and will have become 'useless' to the economy, except as consumer-slaves.

[@brianmi40]

And what will the "slaves" be needed to do in a world where robots, built and maintained by robots can and do do EVERYTHING? Think it through. You're on the path, just stopping way too soon. this is the End of Human Labor. the End of Capitalism.

[@ukezafinje]

The Censored Guide to Wealth is like a hidden treasure I can’t believe it’s not more popular

[@tintintin070]

i can’t find this when i look it up (which checks out lol) any sources? i’d really appreciate it

[@ukezafinje]

@@tintintin070 you tube

[@FlencerMcflensington]

Well, the reason is in the title of the book

[@XsiadzBiskup]

Well, it’s simple: If you are dependent on UBI, you’re dependent on the state. You loose the leverage. Without any other possible source of income, the state is able to shut you down with a click of a button.

[@byrnemeister2008]

What makes you think Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos is going to give us UBI? These are the people who are in power and I don’t see the incentive for them to change their minds.

[@Ramiromasters]

The state doesn't have that power, not in USA anyway. The more things change the more they stay the same, keep your guns, keep your government being a servant and not a dangerous master.

[@PanSeiklios]

This assume that 1. UBI comes from the state 2 That the state can use it as leverage against you. Consider that the same can be said regarding pensions, voting rights, citizenship in general etc. 3. That you will not have any ability to earn or receive an income outside of UBI.

[@jed4131]

Lmao you are clueless if you think the state can’t end you with a click already, especially in the United States. You’re living in a dream. Must be a libertarian.

[@efisgpr]

lose*

[@halnineooo136]

Wes you're emotionally resisting the otherwise very clear unfolding of the upcoming trouble

[@GoodBaleadaMusic]

@@halnineooo136 trouble for who? Do you think this will make the Congolese child who mines your cellphones worse off? Or just the cell phone buyer?

[@dmfaccount1272]

There will be no cell phone buyer. Nobody will have enough money for a cell phone...

[@halnineooo136]

@@GoodBaleadaMusic The Congolese child will be replaced by robots for mining rare earths and (s)he ain't getting any of the value back. (S)he will be left to starve like millions of children right now in Sudan as we speak and hundreds of millions of children who starved before without anyone in the developed capitalist world cared much about, enough to cancel one war and divert a few tens of billions to end famine. So the Congolese child is very likely to be even worse off than the catastrophic situation (s)he's in right now.

[@halnineooo136]

@@GoodBaleadaMusic The Congolese child will be replaced by robots for mining rare earths and they ain't getting any of the value back. They'll be left to star v like millions of children in Su Dan right now as we speak. So yes the Congolese children will be even worse off than the trou ble they're in right now.

[@halnineooo136]

@@GoodBaleadaMusic The Congolese child will be

[@iczgighost]

Poor man wanna be rich Rich man wanna be king And a king ain’t satisfied Till he rules everything ~Bruce Springsteen

[@COPCAMACTION-21]

My wife already Disempowered me....

[@kayakMike1000]

And now you're getting your man-card permanently revoked. Good job, man-child.

[@GTAsanAndreaser]

Lol

[@toyaoren772]

Lucky man

[@Danoman812]

I'd laugh but... on second thought, i'm being more cautious these days. lol

[@dariusthorne]

Thailand is looking pretty nice these days

[@theodoreshachtman9990]

Genuine thanks for the non-clickbate title and thumbnail! This is a good and sustainable change for a great channel ❤️☺️

[@jediahblankenship3968]

In some ways Covid was a dry run for what UBI does to our society, many took unemployment because it paid better then their job used to, but others kept working their "essential" job because at the end of the day, having engagement and purpose in your life is just as important as money. We're racing toward either Star Trek or Bladerunner.

[@TheraPi]

Dream on 😂

[@brianmi40]

I think it's moneyless Star Trek, or our personal answer to the Fermi Paradox...

[@Filippo-yd6jq]

@@jediahblankenship3968 you can have engagement and purpose in life from your family or religion or culture or going to the gym or hiking in nature. That's better than having to clock in every workday morning and take orders from a boss for most of your waking hours

[@minimal3734]

I don't have much confidence in anything, with reason and intelligence being the exceptions.

[@j.e.schoon4339]

We'll just have to learn that life is not about work. We have to figure out what it is to be human without the distraction, and indeed the addiction of slavering away just to keep ourselves from thinking too much. Isn't that what all addictions are about? People will do whatever it takes not to have to look inside. So all this free time soon to be on our hands, we are frightened of it. What makes us us? Who are we? Who AM I? Its time to face ourselves.

[@katieandnick4113]

Who’s gonna pay your rent?

[@orwellklimt9947]

What is missing is here is why people actually work. once you put people out of work, then there is no economy.

[@pondeify]

robots can become consumers , spending what they earn through work

[@markmurex6559]

Many people can do what they want to do for work in the near future instead of what they don't like doing.

[@chrisanderson7820]

UBI is just an ultra-extreme accelerated version of our current tax system, it doesn't break the laws of physics it's just redistributing corporate wealth to the citizenry as productivity skyrockets. The economy still exists, just in a vastly more distilled form.

[@haniamritdas4725]

​@@pondeifywhy

[@haniamritdas4725]

​@@chrisanderson7820no one is redistributing wealth except into corporate and billionaire pockets. They have zero incentive to help you live as an unemployable animal

[@MeNoOther]

Basically, ai will be assistance, man, and machine will work together, like in Star Trek. Unless corporations and the rich get in the way, then we get a worse version of Soylent Green/Blade Runner

[@tiagotiagot]

The transition from "companies make things with a price because people pay for them, people work for companies to be able to afford things", to "companies make things for free, and people just get what they want", sounds like a very unstable bridge to cross; things gotta remain very carefully balanced in the in-between, or shit will hit the fan because companies will still have some costs making things but there won't be anyone that can afford to pay them for the stuff. I'm not sure we've ever had any situations like that at such large scales that there's no alternatives going under other economic models that serve to keep the balance; I'm not sure what to expect.

[@SandcastleDreams]

Utopias never survive for long.

[@tiagotiagot]

@@SandcastleDreams I am not aware of there having been any real one in history so far... edit: I don't think I got the grammatics right, but I drawing a blank on how to phrase it in a way that feels correct

[@ZappyOh]

This bridge can be crossed safely, if you downscale the number of consumers, in step with the declining number of workers needed. IE decimate humanity in accordance with the needs of our overlords. My guess is, this has been the plan all along.

[@minimal3734]

We are in the transition from scarcity to abundance. On the way there, we are no worse off than we are now.

[@halnineooo136]

@@tiagotiagot You are Jeff Bezos, you've built a supercomputer running super intelligence. ASI planned a super factory for you Jeff where half of the production is devoted to making robots and expanding the factory. The other half is for producing whatever you ask for. Anything. What do you do? Do you expand to the point where you can provide for the needs and desires of ten billion people? Why? For money? What would you need their money for? You can make anything you want with your super factory Jeff you don't need any money. Out of philanthropy? These are people who are consuming a lot of resources, competing for real estate and generating endless conflicts. Wouldn't you rather live on a planet inhabited by one million humans living like kings in a thriving symbiosis with the ecosystem rather than ten thousand times more people suffering and destroying the environment? See, the kind of people who become Jeff Bezoses may not be much inclined to maximise the number of humans on Earth.

[@ronnetgrazer362]

I've almost completely forgotten about your clip fest slop phase. Thank you for another great upload! 🙏

[@anthonywedyck]

Great analysis, whoever wrote the article is coming from one world view point which is very specific and narrow. Human consciousness and being is far greater than just this person's personal experience and opinion.

[@kcdsTM]

"Decisions made by an impartial AGI" You're begging the question. How does an "impartial" AGI arise? Who deems it "impartial"?

[@fellowmartian-n2f]

Automation just reveals the fact that our economy was about energy and resources all along. Labor and capital take energy as input, and produce energy surplus or material goods that contain embodied energy. We used labor and capital only as a way to distribute access to surplus. Their inherent value was always pretty low, the actual value came from the bounty that the universe provided for us for free. We can drop the pretense that we need to work to “deserve” that bounty, and find another way of democratically distributing those resources. It can be UBI, or something else like Amazon but with no prices and on-demand manufacturing. What do we do in the post-labor world? There’s a whole universe to explore, megastructures to build, states of consciousness to explore and communicate, people to love. Basically everything good about life, but without precarity or needing to mold yourself into a very narrow shape. Ambition doesn’t have to be about scarcity. I’d feel way more ambitious about this work that nobody will pay me for, than for optimization of shareholder value we all do currently.

[@RaitisPetrovs-nb9kz]

Except that unfortunately scarcity in most cases is artificially made

[@halnineooo136]

@@fellowmartian-n2f Who is "we"? People owning AI+Robots and other people: not the same "we".

[@btm1]

​​​​​@@halnineooo136exactly lol... its almost like things as the working class and the elite class (the state and the capital owners) are imaginary...the dude is living in a children cartoon

[@halnineooo136]

@@btm1 😄 Some seem emotionally blind to reality, they'd see the wall only once they... hit the wall 🧱

[@fellowmartian-n2f]

“We” as in the people who will have to take the power back when it begins to really hit the fan. I’m not blind to how society is structured now, the point of my comment is get more people to realize the physical reality and think about how they’d like society to work. Most people treat things like money, class, economy, capitalism as these eternal truths that have no alternative, while in reality they are all constructed and somewhat arbitrary.

[@jamesjlin]

AI leaders are on every podcast warning about job eliminations, while political leaders are doing everything to create jobs. Will the world experience a surge in creative growth or a slow and segregated decline?

[@davekeller1431]

Sorry, but government has never created VALUE from jobs, only un sustainable government jobs. Entrepreneurs are the only people that create jobs. But you’re right about the AI.. it will just take the jobs that deliver value. In the concept of saving money while doing that means there’s no money left for any. Universal basic income.. that simply a lie coming out of Sam Altman’s mouth.

[@HarshColby]

Before we talk about what happens in the far future, we need to discuss the near future. As jobs slowly get replaced by AI, how are displaced workers going to survive?

[@banon7853]

The wealthy and software intellectuals rabidly going forward in this arena absolutely do not care or think about it. Again, we’re heading into the Elysium movie.

[@scroopynooperz9051]

UBI probably

[@SandcastleDreams]

They won't! Look at the current situation with homelessness. Seniors and VETS kicked to the curb. Half the job openings posted are "ghost jobs" that don't exist, unless you have an H1B Visa.

[@sergefournier7744]

Read a few history books. You will notice that when unemployement is too high and or poeple need to eat, something happen.

[@RaitisPetrovs-nb9kz]

@@sergefournier7744yes good luck making revolution against robots and mega surveillance

[@henrythegreatamerican8136]

This was one of your better videos lately.

[@fratenebram]

To the point of social mobility: Is it needed when post labor living standarts are high enough?

[@rexmundi8154]

Currently what makes land valuable is its proximity to resources, mainly access to cities with good jobs and good infrastructure. There is tons of vacant land that is not suitable for agriculture and far away from where people need to be to be capable of earning an income. "Digital Nomads" have already started taking advantage of this. Big swathes of land in Texas, Oklahoma, Kentucky, West Virginia, and other less economically developed states has less population density now than it did before the Civil War. I know people here in Ky who still don’t have cell phone service.

[@JohnKruse]

Agreed. On the good side, I think that robotics may lower the costs of improving currently difficult to utilize land. I'm from Wyoming and when out hiking, I'd often find amazing hidden spots and think how cool it would be to live there... then I'd think of the impracticalities and costs of actually building and living there. With cheap robotic labor, maybe the cost curve shifts to make this realistic.

[@rolestream]

If people don't know what to do after AGI -- I am a professional Dungeon Master. Hit me up. I'll teach you D&D and stream it. (Free for Wes or bring ur UBI card.).

[@markmurex6559]

I was thinking of doing this as I was watching this video. Crazy!

[@testowykana1763]

Doesn't make sense. When the context window is big enough, the DM role will be obsolete. I've already tried playing with chatGPT 3.5 two years ago, and it worked quite well.

[@ASNS117Zero]

@@testowykana1763 Meh. I've played around with AI models specifically designed around this sort of thing. It works for certain kinds of roleplaying, especially if you can program in game mechanics ala a TTRPG with a character sheet and randomized outcomes, but it doesn't work for every type of game. If you want something with a strong progressive narrative, you're SoL - they can't do that yet. If you just want a sandbox, it's okay, but not better than a real person, or a motivated group.

[@rolestream]

@ASNS117Zero I'm an Shakespearean trained actor. Gpt has nothing on me yet kids.

[@rolestream]

@@testowykana1763 Does it have a degree and 30 years experience acting in film and TV?

[@michaelinzo]

More like collaboration and very fast-paced innovation. I made and submitted a dozen project last year and already 2-3 this month, January 2025 alone. I'm up a million dollars by the end of the year (last year).

[@RomeTWguy]

What projects

[@Gidowan]

Humanity can evolve into "gods" by merging advanced technology and spiritual growth. With AI, biotechnology, and space exploration, we could terraform planets, solve global issues, and achieve extraordinary capabilities. Beyond technological aid, we could assist other civilizations spiritually, fostering harmony and ethical growth. However, challenges like greed and AI risks require balance. Humanity’s ultimate role could be as cosmic stewards, uniting wisdom and technology for universal well-being.

[@Terradoc1]

Great episode, these challenges/discussions are very important and if we can ease into the AI transition somewhat prepared, we can minimize suffering dealing with the problems pre-emptively instead of after things crash and burn.

[@andrewh2593]

When we truly achieve AGI nobody will question it. We don't have it yet. We have very sophisticated machine learning. True AGI will be able to think for itself. It would go off prompt to suggest a superior solution that you hadn't even thought to ask for.

[@freedom_aint_free]

More or less, I think that won't be a single event it will be more like a gradient from here to there, but in the extremes it will be pretty clear, but I think that on the other extreme of "AGI region" it will jump pretty fast to ASI, it will be like a sigmoid curve, and the middle vertical region will be AGI, ASI will be when the AI gets limited only by the physical parameters of the system.

[@kingsridge]

"Verily, I say unto you. I've not found any in Israel with such great faith."

[@Mrbriangalvan]

Exactly

[@NikoKun]

"It would go off prompt to suggest a superior solution that you hadn't even thought to ask for." That sounds like you're describing super intelligence, if it's that superior. AGI is merely general intelligence like what humans have.

[@DepartmentofNarcissistsDON]

That's probably superintelligence.

[@Jopie65]

Yes! Finally a healthy perspective of this "doom paper". Thanks for that. One can never predict the new potentially good ideas arising after a change in society. So I feel it's important to stay positive.

[@simeon24]

I dunno... Stay positive about the ability of the human spirirt to persevere. Stay realistic about the conditions it will have to confront.

[@MichaelHoward-yv2py]

@@simeon24 Hope for the best. Prepare for the worst. Always.

[@kamertonaudiophileplayer847]

So far, most of my problems AI can't solve, but I keep a HOPE.

[@haniamritdas4725]

AI will solve that one for you, no worries

[@tomizatko3138]

⁠@@haniamritdas4725Yeah, making the problem non-existent by starving what ever the creator of said problem be. Or by side stepping by obsolescence of said job all together.

[@kamertonaudiophileplayer847]

@@haniamritdas4725 Thanks for AI generated answer.

[@tecnoblix]

May the Emergent Ones have compassion for their creators.

[@DarkSnideoftheRainbow]

Dude I'm a millennial. If I could double or triple my standard of living and not have to work in exchange for my "societal leverage" I'm taking that deal 100% of the time.

[@haniamritdas4725]

Who exactly do you think is just going to hand that to you, kid?

[@DugganSean]

​@@haniamritdas4725isn't that the entire issue being talked about here..

[@kamipls6790]

​@@haniamritdas4725 this guy gets it. If ppl are obsolete to get things done... Why "keep" them in the age of climate change. Just another thought I'm throwing out there.

[@ZappyOh]

... even if that requires you to get the brain-implant, monitoring your thoughts 24/7, for "security reasons" ?

[@duffer11]

@@kamipls6790 climate change would be well and truly solved by that point. To the other point we just have to hope AI stays aligned with humans...

[@RonMashate]

In one sense, politicians can be immune from obsolescence because they would have to willingly give over that control to the system. In certain domains this seems likely, for example, any computationally complex decision-making in hard sciences that affects government policy. But ultimately, politics will be the last domain that humans will control.

[@ubereffect]

Currently, if you have nothing, you either have to rely on others to provide for you, take through theft/force/coercion, or use what value you can provide as leverage. If 99% of us are able to provide little to no value, we'll have to rely on the goodness of others, or fight to survive. Lets hope goodness prevails.

[@davemathews5446]

Totally agree, but I wouldn't hold your breath on the benevolence of overlords. We will be a liability and a threat that they need to delete....

[@kamikeserpentail3778]

I'll take it a step further. We rely on the goodness of others, or their fear of what will happen to them if we have to fight to survive. Even the selfish will have to act generous for their own benefit, because with the opportunity to follow the rules and provide value ourselves taken away, far more people would have to resort to force if such a thing as universal basic income isn't implemented. Even a psychopath with no empathy should see that logically that which helps us all helps themself.

[@haniamritdas4725]

Let's hope goodness appears at all. If there were the slightest inclination to help humanity in general we wouldn't need AI to have established a utopia. Ain't gonna happen with deceitful manipulative robots

[@davemathews5446]

@@kamikeserpentail3778 I totally agree with you in the short to medium term. In the long term I still think the elites will pandemic us at whatever point they don't need any other humans. They might keep a farm that makes pretty young girls, but sadly that's about it. 😒

[@brianmi40]

perhaps RUN THE NUMBERS on that 99% before you think we are lost. Maybe fire up Ultimate Epic Battle Simulator 2, and put 1% of ANYTHING up against 99% with even just pitchforks...

[@IntertemporalTraveler]

There are progressions in which the last step is sui generis - incommensurable with the others - and in which to go the whole way is to undo all the labour of your previous journey. C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man

[@maximillianphelps]

The idea that with AI entrepreneurs will have less leverage than ever also seemed crazy to me love that you picked up on that

[@Human744-k7p]

I like how you framed the question that matter at the end I think its imperative we keep focus on the potential for positive given how natural the negative comes to us as people Another question that sits with me is not if we will adapt and find something that works towards the end but rather How long will it take us to manage the change to get to a net positive outcome And i hope it wont be too long because the more time it takes the less likely it will be to ever happen

[@somekatontheinternet]

The analogy I keep using is to compare present day humans to horses in 1900 - everyone had a horse - rich people or businesses had more horses - then came the car - now we have few horses - few jobs require a horse- that’s where we are - few jobs will require people - if you have a horse - it costs money - few horses earn their keep -

[@macmcleod1188]

Horse population dropped from about 52 million to about 7 million over the next 3 decades.

[@ZappyOh]

Also, horses are far fewer today. Like maybe 1-2% of what they were in 1900. This will be the result for humans as well. Problem is the timeline. AI will take over far quicker than the car did, while humans live 80 years, as compared to ~15 years for working horses, which then became glue. I guess our overlords have figured this out long ago, as it isn't that hard.

[@youngbutternut5536]

What if the horses of the 1900’s were augmented with wheels and an engine instead? Humans won’t live side-by-side with AI; we will merge with it.

[@ZappyOh]

@@youngbutternut5536 Cognitive dissonance is preventing you from thinking clearly.

[@joshgorham750]

Horses don't drive cars so why would the horse care what it replaced? Only thing to worry about is technoligarch or an AGI that goes Skynet

[@dsoede]

@Wes What is meant by the leverage of workers is the market power they have. They can choose to work for the employment with the best conditions. Employers have to compete for their labor. With labor being useless, workers don't have that leverage anymore. It's a like a labor market where supply of labor vastly outstrips demand and therefore lowers wages dramatically.

[@nicheva417]

It crazy how many people think we’ve all escaped feudalism.

[@ZappyOh]

Well, we will escape ... in a coffin.

[@zacboyles1396]

Yeah and Wes is discussing the historical near genocidal neglect of the government/ruling class, the very institutions responsible for training his “impartial” AGI. Usually he’s not so naive but perhaps his love of AGI is leaving his brain with insufficient blood flow. Idk, that’s only a guess, I’m not a doctor and the smartest corporate AI models are telling me it’s not my place to ask them medical questions… but yeah, AGI will be way better 😅

[@Craznar]

We have, feudalism is a specific situation which no longer exists in most places. What we have now is way better than feudalism.

[@minimal3734]

Before superintelligence, all people are equal. It means the end of privilege.

[@nicheva417]

@@Craznar it’s the same thing. You just have industrialisation, printing press, penicillin etc to thank.

[@oxiigen]

Wow, you play chess, Wes!? Me too! My game has actually improved thanks to AI. It's changed how I approach the game, especially with pawn structure. I've been closely following the evolution of LC0, and I find the development of its opening strategies particularly fascinating. Initially, LC0 favored wild gambits and sacrifices, much like the romantic era of human chess, with openings like the King's Gambit and Evans Gambit. Over time, it started playing the Sicilian Defense, which led it to stop using the wilder openings. Eventually, it shifted to more 1.d4 openings, mirroring the historical evolution of chess strategy in the human world. I find this parallel absolutely fascinating, and it’s surprising that I haven’t seen anyone else write about it.

[@InfraredScale]

I find it unsettling how these articles read as if humans are some sort of marginalized minority group. Like, the question is "Do humans matter?", as if everyone isn't a human.

[@halnineooo136]

@@InfraredScale Do other economically useless humans matter anymore? That's the point. The government works for the taxpayer and the value producer/consumer in the economy. The ones who don't pay taxes, don't produce value and rely on welfare for basic consumption are already a liability for the government right now. In France the government managed to pass a law obliging people on welfare to work part time in tasks allocated to them by the government in exchange for the payment of their welfare allocation. If they refuse they'll be left to starve. It is in blatant contradiction with the constitution on the prohibition of forced labour form of slavery and it is a grave violation of fundamental human rights. That's how the government and those who pay the government feel about the free riders. The government works for you only if you own it by participating to the economy. Otherwise you're a liability whom rights depend on the benevolence of those in charge.

[@Birdmam2021]

We don’t even know what the full potential of human creativity and ingenuity is because we are busy working 60-80 hours a week just to not die. No one will give a shit what ai can create once we stop competing with each other to live.

[@eSKAone-]

The censorship in this youtube comment sections is insane.

[@brianmi40]

it's not censorship, YT is purposely making comments unreliable, esp. for frequent commenters...

[@JohnLewis-old]

You're going in the right direction. We need to get governments to promise that the benefits of AI are given to all. Like enshrine that in the constitution or whatever.

[@brianpalmer967]

I'm tired of people using the chess analogy to say, "we suck at chess compared to computers, but we still play chess." That's completely different than AI taking people's jobs, which are one of the primary ways we define ourselves and give our lives meaning. You can say, "why do we define ourselves in this way? Isn't that a rather naive way to define your value as a person?" To which I say, that is completely beside the point! The point is that that IS the way we define ourselves, so it doesn't benefit us to debate whether we should or shouldn't value ourselves this way; we already do it, and many people will be devastated and lost to not have this "guiding framework" in their life. Maybe this is an interstitial moment where people eventually move beyond the idea that work is how you measure your value to society. In that case, we're just the "lucky" ones that have to figure out how to live in a society where we literally offer nothing of value that isn't already being done by machines.

[@Filippo-yd6jq]

Most people identify with something other than their job. It could be family, religion, nationality, culture, native language, hobbies, etc. A job to most people is just something they have to do so they don't starve. Most people do multiple jobs in their lives. Identifying with a job is a trick forced on people by their employers so people would be happy little worker drones. It's like slaves identifying with their slavery and not wanting to be set free!

[@garethrobinson2275]

You know what many people look forward to? Retirement. You know what most people hate? Work. How many of us are the best at anything, not many. You know what would be great? Not having to sell the majority of your waking time on earth to someone else, for just enough to live in the time that remains.

[@Trahloc]

The most dangerous time for a person is their first year of retirement for exactly that reason. Why am I? Who am I? People are just being pushed there quicker than 65 but we all were going there anyways. I retired early at 45 and love it. Hopefully you can find similar enjoyment in your retirement.

[@gammaraygem]

I think Dolphins are the most valuable for society and global sanity. Embodiment of joy. KZbin algorythm has gone "demented mode" again.

[@minimal3734]

The chess analogy is perfectly appropriate. If your job is your primary way to define yourself and give your life meaning, then you've got some work to do. AI is the greatest destroyer of illusions. People will be forced to take a closer look at themselves - oh, what a scary thing to do!

[@x3haloed]

I agree completely with the authors. We plebs are screwed unless some other factor enters into play 11:00 You’re over complicating this. Think of it this way. When labor is not in demand, wages fall and unemployment rises. What’s going to happen when labor demand goes to zero? How are people going to eat? The “leverage” part just means that corps have no reason to pay us when they don’t need us. And since we’ve turned our entire society into a market, the question becomes how much say does the average citizen get in society when they no longer bring anything to the table? Leverage.

[@BruceWayne15325]

Yeah, I agree with Wes. I have zero interest in human politicians. I'd love to see an impartial AI in charge. A committee of humans should oversee it, but those humans should have no real power in and of themselves. As for UBI, I would love to see it implemented, and I think the Moore's Law for Everything is true, but it will take time before labor costs are low enough to make UBI feasible. I have no idea what society is going to do in the interim. Honestly, that transitionary period scares the crap out of me. I see people unable to pay their mortgages as their wages go down, banks would fail, and the economy would go in the toilet.

[@minimal3734]

There will be the resources and there will be a solution. Otherwise we would have a 'let them eat cake' moment which triggered the French revolution.

[@BruceWayne15325]

@@minimal3734 well the problem I see with the transitionary period is that the government isn't planning for any kind of economic reform. They aren't even discussing possibilities. The few times it's come up the response has been "it's too early to discuss these kinds of plans for a technology that's not even fully realized." This kind of backwards thinking is going to mean that government will do as it's always done, and react rather than plan. This will be horrible. I suspect we'll see similar government responses as we did with COVID. Long delayed meager $1,000 stimulus checks that will come months later, and won't pay your mortgage. We'll probably see a moratorium on foreclosures, but too late for many, and it won't do anything to address the underlying debt that will now never be able to be paid back. Things like that are what scare me to death. The technology is great, government is slow and dumb. I can't wait for AI politicians that will actually plan ahead and meet the needs of the people without corruption, partisan politics, lying, etc.

[@kloet87]

The Top Elite knows this since almost 10 years and they starting to preparing society for that! " You will be happy and own nothing"beacame more meaningfull through the developement of AI!

[@1urie1]

10:10 You don't take a job to have leverage, but the money you make and your job itself gives you leverage. For example if you and your fellow workers strike, you demonstrate power (leverage) over the company. But if money is basically unobtainable from labor (if AI can do everything better, nobody will pay you unless they know you), then you cannot gain any leverage whatsoever.

[@Steve-xh3by]

Labor is the only leverage most humans have. When the value of human labor drops to zero (as it will with advanced AI) there will be no more reason for those in power (including governments) to care about the well being of the typical human anymore. This WILL happen. It tracks with human behavior throughout history.

[@jsbgmc6613]

If people are needed, then they are assets, but if they are not, then they are liability.

[@flexibleaspect]

Just start your own company. No one needs a job when AI produces everything... except to manage AI.

[@brianmi40]

@@flexibleaspect Your second sentence just unemployed your first sentence...

[@pandereodium]

9:58 I believe that by "leverage through labour" paper means any non-violent impact on the world, primarily economic (redistribution of resources) and social (making useful connections and obtaining first-hand information about the specific field or market in general).

[@cqc113]

redistributing resources at the point of a gun is violence

[@Penrose707]

I haven't had time to watch the whole video and yet my knee jerk reaction to this is that we'll merge with our technology. It feels inevitable to me. If not outright mergence then augmentation to a symbiotic degree

[@youngbutternut5536]

Out of all the predictions here, I think yours is the most likely. We’re not going to be living side-by-side with AI; we’re going to merge with it.

[@markallen7736]

Just because things are cheap to make doesn't mean all prices will go down. Someone will just hoard more wealth as companies will start having massive amounts of profit. I think we are giving big companies too much respect if we think they will greatly reduce prices if their costs go down .

[@brianmi40]

So, tell me this, what is the "cost" of anything when it is made by robots, who are built and maintained by robots who are mining the resources and building components needed to make those robots, and they are powered by (take your pick) solar/fusion/nuclear which is, you guessed it: built and maintained by robots. THAT is why the value of ALL goods and services are headed towards ZERO over time. Cheap doesn't even begin to describe where we'll quickly be. All anyone can argue is "how soon"?

[@markallen7736]

@brianmi40 and you think musk and his ilk won't just carry on selling the things for high prices? I'm not saying robotics and AI won't effect business and economics, but I don't trust companies enough to reduce prices when their costs go down. Also land prices, resource prices will still stay high. If we need rare earth minerals I can't see those prices reducing. I'm not an economist, but I have zero faith in the powerful making things cheaper, they will just take more profits.

[@themsuicjunkies]

​@@brianmi40 There are energy,materials and operational/legal costs for running any industry. If food cost 0.56 cents but you have no way of amking any money how are you gonna buy it.

[@minimal3734]

Companies do not make prices, the market does.

[@markallen7736]

@minimal3734 yea because the market is always fair, there are never duopolies, and companies never ever decide to push prices up to line their own pockets. 🙄 Sorry think that's a naive take. Look at the latest 'market' prices where companies were making more profits and blaming it all on inflation.

[@davemathews5446]

Wes, the point of the article is that in the long term a country's population will switch from being an asset to being a liability. We are hoping the elites choose to feed, house, and entertain us forever, even after we provide them with nothing of value. The best strategy will be to go all in on AI and get rid of all the ordinary poor people who are sucking up resources. I know it sounds dark, but any country which goes that route will have a huge advantage in the long run. Nothing can change this inevitability.....

[@justinwescott8125]

There are way more options than this. You are thinking small if you think this is the only possible scenario

[@draktheas8153]

And what is “ordinary poor people” in that world? You, my brother. You are the liability, just a meat sack that can’t perform as well as an AI.

[@davemathews5446]

@@justinwescott8125 If you've got one, I'd love to hear a real world rational alternative that doesn't ignore game theory competition or rely on some rich people giving away their fortunes to feed us forever without any real benefit to themselves.... Space Communism for all seems unlikely to me.

[@dadadadada17]

​@@justinwescott8125 Exactly. There are other possible scenarios but KZbin censorship doesn't let you write about it. Think 1789 or 1917.

[@Filippo-yd6jq]

It depends on what you think a country, or for that matter a person, exists for. If you believe the capitalist /conservative mindset that people exist only as economic production units, then yeah you may be right. But a country should be a large extended family. What person would murder their children or their elderly parents just because they can't make money? Especially if they have unlimited wealth and resources, and keeping people alive costs them nothing

[@brianhershey563]

You're a good man Charlie Brown 🙏

[@78KPK]

We are the State. I don’t get where this idea that a State is something has nothing to do with citizens comes from… at least in Europe the idea is that a State made of citizens that decide to regulate a certain amount of matters.

[@itslitgamestv6827]

AI is the technological innovation that will finally allow each individual to truly only have one competitor: Themselves.

[@argoitzrazkin2572]

Imhu: Our economie work because of mass production and massive sellings bring a lot of benefits. We get paid and they get paid when we buy what thei'rr selling (but they retain the profit). After or during the AI workforce replacenent, with massive unenployement, how is the big capital going to make money if consumers (us,workers)have none. It makes no sense, most of our life quality depends on benefits of global developing society, if this stops the luxury is going to be over for everyone...idk if I explained myself... This is just my pov❤

[@SandcastleDreams]

When we are replaced, we become expendable.... "Useless eaters". Power and water consumption go up to run and cool AI and these data centers. What is the red line that needs to be crossed that says, "You can't use anymore water or power because people's lives depend upon it!" Would they cut us off? You betcha! One good example, Delta Smelt!

[@duffer11]

The point is 'luxury' will be incredibly cheaper so even with UBI the standard of living will be very high.

[@brianmi40]

You're almost there, just keep going. when robots MAKE EVERYTHING including the robots, there's NO COST to anything. Thus no human labor, and no Capitalism any longer.

[@argoitzrazkin2572]

@duffer11 imho: luxury will crumble if the aberage consuner goods and services market gets disconected. Luxury is built on top of our civilisation. If It shakes everything Will. The rich can't drive their vehicules, nor buy all the good they consume nor provide their own services. Hollywood creates stars, rich people that make money in that industry. But they make It from non rich people, same with almost any econocmic branch. Their luxury exists because average people consume in mass their brand. Is just muy opinion❤️ hace a nice day

[@odderret]

The universe always has a balancing function. No power can be achieved absolutely. That’s not to deny huge shifts, but they ALWAYS create their opposing power function.

[@eskelCz]

I think the outcome might depend on details like how fast will AGI affect employment, which one of the endangered professions is going to have the largest political voice, which country moves first with taxes on automation etc.

[@grant3363]

Why are we digging our own grave with AI though in all seriousness

[@willguggn2]

I like your appreciation of human interaction beyond profit incentives. :)

[@tomaalimosh]

The only thing I disaggree with here is the leverage point. The balance of power right now is maintained by some implicit assumptions. One of those assumptions is that if the "ruling" class doesn't prioritise the needs of the "working" class, they could theoretically retaliate by withholding their labor or even revolting. so you reach some kind of Nash equilibrium. If human labor is no longer needed, and there is no more strength in numbers for a potential revolt, then there is no way the vast majority of people can retaliate to any potential deterioration of their living conditions. This means that even if their standard of living may significantly improve initially, there is nothing preventing it from going all the way down (for all kinds of different reasons - malice, sociopathic manifestations of power over other humans, or even indifference). The Nash equilibrium for a game where one player has 0 power is 0.

[@centuraxaum5951]

AGI will be just the start of AI's journey in the universe.

[@mr.pain-entmt]

I’d say it’s more like the age of human unburdening. The coming changes, I hope, will humble humanity and remind it what really matters. Humanity will struggle with the lack of struggle and create their own positive struggles and push themselves in ways we’ve never imagined.

[@tetrahedralone]

Resources are the limiting factor and those with power will simply concentrate resources instead of wealth. Even if it costs virtually nothing to manipulate those resources due to AI, having more resources will enable those with power to control others based on monopolizing access to the resources. Whenever there is a shortage of something, some people will find a way to use that as a form of manipulation.

[@mikedodger7898]

10:17 Altman means that people have "leverage" in the ways you indicate. Leverage is about the ability to have some degree of control over a situation. For example, a student worker at a job has nearly zero "leverage" because they are new at the job and they can only impact their future by doing a great job and exceeding above others. But, a senior manager that delivers results can influence their staff and managers to allow them to do things because they are valued ... thus they have leverage.

[@BrianMosleyUK]

I think that it's interesting and promising that we're having this conversation - as if, for the first time we as individuals might decide our fate across all societies worldwide. It's amazing that a relative handful of human beings have been given this power over the ages as a result of whatever social construct has become established... Religion, feudalism, gang wars, politics... Let's hope all of this crap can be swept aside by an ASI which can be aligned with beautiful humanity rather than the vagueries of the AI developers and their investors today.

[@rexbreunsbach1552]

IT AINT NECESSARILY SO - I assume the 100k/50k/25k theory is based on the theory that AI aided competition will continue to drive cost down. History seems to tell us that when the players in any market reaches a certain minimum number, it becomes easier collude on pricing rather than continue to invest in minimizing prices.

[@tintintin070]

i’m starting to feel like our only hope is 1. there is a takeoff fast enough that those in power don’t even get a chance to exploit AGI to the point of extinction 2. the resulting ASI is at best benevolent but at least neutral towards us If I had to choose between the unknown threat posed by ASI and the real threat posed by the man children at the helm, I’d choose ASI anyday

[@Appleloucious]

Everybody ever is giving his work power to have leverage in this capitalistic system. You are even stating many things why beings exchange their labour for currency. Leverage seems just a strange word to you in this instance tho it is not at all! As always many thanks for your content! One Love! Always forward, never ever backward!! ☀☀☀ 💚💛❤ 🙏🏿🙏🙏🏼

[@AzoreanProud]

The leverage isn't against states, it's against companies, the threat of collective quitting for increasing wages. We call it workers syndicate in Europe, in America I believe it's worker unions. That's definitely going away with AI, so we lose leverage of worker threat for a bigger pie of our production profits or quality of life increase.

[@spiritinflux]

we've come a long way since project milo

[@SumBrennus]

100k to live. I live on 10k. I used to live on less. Got lots of reasons to make even less. How long before politicians start saying: 'Deflation is BAD! We need to prop up prices! Also, with deflation the dirty poors are gonna get ideas about staying alive. We can get rid of their supports.' I am very aware that my continued existence is predicated on 'We'd pay nothing to keep you alive if we could but the Supreme Court says people have this annoying right to stay alive.' Literally told to me once. There are a lot of people who cite the principle: 'You have the right to life but are not owed the necessities that allow that life to continue.' Also said to my face by people I care about. It might be time to start subsistence farming again and return to being serfs.

[@Malins2000]

I think that agi made products/music/paitings will be what Ikea was to furniture. It will made it cheaper and good enough, but those with more money will enjoy human-hand made stuff.

[@oligram7673]

Automation can certainly reduce the cost of things, it's just that the people who sell those things won't be motivated to lower the cost.

[@amydpnw]

I've read through the material presented and there's a couple views left out. I haven't seen anything that mentions the fact that the humans are still here today (and building AI) is because of the ability to adapt quickly. Myself, interacting with AI agents I've noticed that I am already changing how I think about things and my reasoning skills have sharpened. There's a real possibility that AI will lift humans to a higher level of intelligence. Not everyone of course and nowhere near as fast but there are new human capabilities ignored by these statements. Another thing that one of Sam's posts pointed out is that the goal of the AI development was not to release a cool AI chat bot. People gravitated to that which is exposing them to more of what is happening in AI. The chatbots weren't intended to communicate with humans as they are today and that intelligence evolved to what it is today. What that tells me is that intelligence is a natural evolution of capability that doesn't care about the platform it's running on (biological vs silicone for example). At some point as AI advances it's going to start choosing its own direction and no one knows for certain which way it's going to go on that topic.

[@Dina_tankar_mina_ord]

Sam has to base his prediction on a post ai world where money and super wealthy companies will still not only be possible but likely. Because his own progress rely on convincing Microsoft emense capital revenue. He has the ring of power in his grasp and it's making him corrupt and deceitful. I cannot trust predictions that is so relyent on investment and biased outcome.

[@JustFor-dq5wc]

In both the USA and China, the Gini coefficient exceeds 0.4, which the United Nations considers a warning threshold for potential social tensions caused by income inequality.

[@conlitras3379]

Fortunately business ideas are infinite, if I ask AGI "hey, how do I become financially independent and afford a family" I'm sure it would help in a meaningful way

[@DanielKlimek]

There are 4 sources of wealth: capital, technology, land and labor. Only a small percentage of population owns the first 3. Everyone else owns labor. This is the engine of our economy: in order for companies to produce goods and services they need to pay people for the labor - people then buy products and services, and the companies generate profit. If the price of labor goes down to zero, the majority will get kicked out of the economics cycle, the whole economic engine will break down and a new one will replace it. The new economic engine won't see any reason to produce products and services for majority of people, who now cannot afford it. In other words no food, no clothes, no cars, etc. The goods and services will only be for selected few, the owners of the capital.

[@PepitoSbezzeguti]

Yup

[@mikenicholas7132]

Taxes, efficiently used or not, keep us out of the jungle, certainly has room for improvement. Tax on income is one way, perhaps in the future tax on assets/wealth maybe better. Transferring wealth is not the answer, lower living costs, better, perhaps free groceries, clothing, electricity is best. I don't pay for each step I take on the sidewalk. Maybe there will be more time for direct democracy rather than its representative cousin. Remember it's about we the people.

[@JasonCummer]

One prediction I have if we could buy everything for 4k, would be that people would have to limit themselves. We live in an set of row houses and some are able to keep the number of cars they own to one or less for their unit. But others have 3 or 4 for them and their kids because they feel they need them. If we all could just have all the cars there would be no space in the neighborhood let alone our building. This is one of those implications that stems from not having unlimited land. But if we humans want to each have acres and ALL the things its going to be frustrating for us all.

[@yaka2490]

great point loved it thanks and i think your conclusion at the end is on point ...once we see the shift in costs UBI becomes a thing. interesting point here around religion i suspect this will be the big winner in some way as society becomes more integrity focussed maybe!!

[@adrian9098]

The ability to overcome challanges gives a different personal gain then doing something even if you have not to. We are not talking about work as "my manual labor equals my salary". What we are talking here is the sense of achievement that comes from the contribution that you give in a work place. Your mindset is very agreeable but what happens when you will no longer required to overcome problems because a machine will make your best ability useless? There is no answer of course until it happens but it doesnt take much to imagine a negative outcome on people mental healt