By default, capital will matter more than ever after AGI
The rise of artificial general intelligence may reduce the value of human labor, concentrating wealth and power among AI controllers, potentially leading to societal stagnation and diminished state-citizen relationships.
Read original article
The article discusses the economic implications of artificial general intelligence (AGI) and its potential to replace human labor with capital. It argues that as AI becomes capable of performing tasks traditionally done by humans, the value of human labor will diminish, leading to a society where capital becomes increasingly important. This shift could result in a static society with entrenched power imbalances, as the ability to generate wealth and influence will be concentrated among those who control AI technologies. The author suggests that while universal basic income (UBI) may be implemented to address unemployment, the fundamental dynamics of power and wealth distribution could change drastically. The ability to convert money into results will improve with AI, as AIs can be cloned and are less constrained by human preferences. However, this could also lead to a scenario where states have less incentive to care for their citizens, as the economic power shifts away from human labor. The article concludes that the rise of labor-replacing AI may create a society where human ambition is stifled, and the relationship between states and individuals becomes less symbiotic.
- The rise of AGI may diminish the value of human labor, increasing the importance of capital.
- Power dynamics could become static, with entrenched wealth and influence among those controlling AI.
- Universal basic income may not address the underlying issues of power and wealth distribution.
- AI's ability to be cloned will enhance the capacity to convert money into results.
- States may have less incentive to care for citizens as economic power shifts away from human labor.
Related
All the existential risk, none of the economic impact. That's a shitty trade
Despite high expectations, AI advancements have not significantly impacted productivity or profits. Concerns about creating highly intelligent entities pose potential existential threats, urging careful monitoring and management of AI implications.
There's Just One Problem: AI Isn't Intelligent, and That's a Systemic Risk
AI mimics human intelligence but lacks true understanding, posing systemic risks. Over-reliance may lead to failures, diminish critical thinking, and fail to create enough jobs, challenging economic stability.
There's Just One Problem: AI Isn't Intelligent
AI mimics human intelligence without true understanding, posing systemic risks and undermining critical thinking. Economic benefits may lead to job quality reduction and increased inequality, failing to address global challenges.
The Intelligence Age
Advancements in AI will enhance human capabilities and problem-solving, with deep learning playing a crucial role. Equitable access requires reduced computing costs, while the transition presents opportunities and challenges.
Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Work
Recent AI advancements may reshape job markets by complementing or replacing human labor. The National Academies' report emphasizes the need for education, collaboration, and data collection to address associated risks.
4 commentsAt which point you run headlong into the paradox of productivity.
If you don't hire and pay the humans, then who is going to have the income to buy the output?
And then after that you have the problem of why anybody should operate the machines for longer than they need to provide what they require. There's a great belief amongst technologists that they can distribute output to everybody, but that still requires somebody to work longer hours than they need to provide for themselves. Why should they work Fridays to produce output for everybody else? After all those they are providing for can no longer produce anything of material value in exchange.
Until you have machines doing absolutely everything, there will need to be policies in place to ensure that the 'socially necessary labour' is distributed in terms of hours. Otherwise the default is a slave class who have most of their machine enhanced output confiscated for the benefit of other people simply to ensure they continue to work the 40 hour weeks necessary to produce all the output without the machines failing.
And if that labour requires incredibly high skill that only those with IQs over 140 can provide, then we have a fundamental problem. Collectively we can't give these people anything more to get them to work all those hours. They can provide for themselves all they materially need with the machines.
As Ali put it, "service to others is the rent we pay for our room here on earth". If we can no longer be of service to others, then we can't make the rent.
Shuffling money around doesn't fix that basic issue. I use up some of my finite life to help you because you are using up some of your finite life to help me.
The irony with hiring robots is that you can't exploit them. You have to tend to their every needs or they break and stop working. Since you own and paid for the robot, it is your problem if it breaks.
You can exploit humans, because their parents, extended family and friends have made the initial "investments" to grow that human into a useful worker and the exploiting employer is just taking these investments for himself.
Because you're not paying for the full cost of that productivity and are just renting the labor, you can easily replace the exhausted worker with a fresh one.
There is also another problem: flooding the world with capital will make it worthless.
The article mentions UBI, which is similar to the adenosine triphosphate energy cycle in our body. There are also some forms of "hormones" to make sure every cell lives happily.
One particular interesting question: is this the inevitable way of all evolving creatures in the galaxy? Can we spot other "super-intelligence" planets like the super-intelligence Earth?
Also, the Wright Brothers analogy is just plain wrong. Their invention, patent, and contribution to flight was about control surfaces and a method for operating them such that heavier than air craft could stay off the ground long enough to be useful. And that all came from recognizing the similarities between the way that birds moved and bicycles steered. Money/funding had little to do with it.
Related
All the existential risk, none of the economic impact. That's a shitty trade
Despite high expectations, AI advancements have not significantly impacted productivity or profits. Concerns about creating highly intelligent entities pose potential existential threats, urging careful monitoring and management of AI implications.
There's Just One Problem: AI Isn't Intelligent, and That's a Systemic Risk
AI mimics human intelligence but lacks true understanding, posing systemic risks. Over-reliance may lead to failures, diminish critical thinking, and fail to create enough jobs, challenging economic stability.
There's Just One Problem: AI Isn't Intelligent
AI mimics human intelligence without true understanding, posing systemic risks and undermining critical thinking. Economic benefits may lead to job quality reduction and increased inequality, failing to address global challenges.
The Intelligence Age
Advancements in AI will enhance human capabilities and problem-solving, with deep learning playing a crucial role. Equitable access requires reduced computing costs, while the transition presents opportunities and challenges.
Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Work
Recent AI advancements may reshape job markets by complementing or replacing human labor. The National Academies' report emphasizes the need for education, collaboration, and data collection to address associated risks.