Art, writing, and basic programming are just the easiest ones to tackle first. You have fast iteration cycles because iteration is virtual.
This temporary period of difficulty is the price we pay for AGI, which will yield far more benefit in the long run.
So mass prostitution for women and mass gang violence for men is what the younger generation gets. To the benefit of the few and the elderly. It's already happening.
How will the clients pay if AI has already taken away the jobs?
So the result is that most women and a few men will have offspring, the rest of the men are exterminated from the genome. A future generation of people having a lot of cousins, with all the genetical diseases it brings.
Every new significant invention means massive genetical extermination of males and a new cycle of power struggles. A stable society with monogamy and equality among people is a rare breather.
As for benefits, likely for everyone. People don't work just to make money, people make money since they work and produce for society right? Making money was never the end goal, and if we can avoid more work, that should be better for society as a whole.
In short, automation shifted the amount that needed to be done in certain industries. AI could possibly make shift so large that there won't be enough work for everyone to do.
I’m really not trying to argue for or against any new technology. But I don’t see why any new technological change necessarily brings about UBI given the absolutely drastic reduction in the amount of labor necessary for human survival we already achieved in the mid 1900’s. So my question is still, why did the old forms of automation not bring about a post scarcity utopia (or at least a UBI)?
I wasn't trying to say that people don't work for money fullstop, but rather that money isn't what people are trying to get ultimately. People want things, things that make people happy and alive. They get money in order to acquire those things.
This is questionable at best. Im glad you have optimism, but do you have any facts that show it won't be a long run benefit like cfcs, or lead in everything?
> This temporary period of difficulty is the price we pay...
Im glad you're signing me up for difficulty. I get that you probably think you stand to benefit in some way from AGI, so why don't you pay the price yourself instead of volunteering others? Maybe it's because the difficulty that it causes really really sucks, and the benefit isn't worth paying the price yourself?
It's irrelevant what the average person thinks about AGI because they can't see past the short term fear of losing their job.
They can't see the billions of lives that will be saved, the therapies and medicines and technologies that will be developed, etc. Nothing about the concept of the "singularity" registers, just fear about their next paycheck - a fear to be expressed to their government at that, instead of killing progress that may one day save their own or their children's lives.
We volunteer you for AGI, and myself, and everyone else, because our selfish shortsighted nature and fear for our jobs are not worth the lives and suffering and death and disease of billions of people to come. It's sad that we lose our jobs - but it is the price we pay for the cure to everything. The best we can do is implement UBI while we make this transition as a species.
Trying to stop the development of AGI out of this fear is akin to being a plague doctor trying to stop the development of penicillin so as to not be out of work. I get it, we are all afraid for our jobs, but their importance does not stand a candle to the reduction in global human suffering AGI would be able to net us.
We are all literally going to die, you hear me? You, me, our children. It's not going to be pretty, because the lack of choice/consent around dying is the single biggest driver of human suffering, full stop.
But AGI could at least give us a choice here, a choice to spend many decades more in healthy life with those we cherish and love, fully provided for and safe and secure, and that's worth more than any job.
Saying there's a singularity in the future, when that's so very far from a guaranteed future in many people's eyes - who's to say we don't end up with a dystopian Terminator future rather than a utopian Star Trek future? Your time machine is just as good as theirs. We have three choices for our future. The billionaires, corporations, and the government. One of those three is where the singularity is going to come from. Which do you pick? Unfortunately, all three a flawed in different ways, so utopian Star Trek future of the singularity is by no means even guaranteed inn the first place.
You want people to trust that one of those three groups will just grant the rest of us living in the singularity. For all of human history, every revolution, it's been the same - there's been new jobs created. Just wait for it to be different this time. Avoiding the question of if we'll ever develop AGI because it's irrelevant, the question is when will machines be able to fix themselves, because that's when no new jobs or follow on jobs need be created.
If no new jobs end up being created, then what?
One time, it'll be different. I don't think we're looking at that quite just yet, but it doesn't see that far off in the future. Openinterpreter is already fixing problems for me on my computer without much intervention, robots doing the same for robots really doesn't seem impossibly far off.
I just pointed out that rushing into something that could make things better has historically involved an awful lot of suffering for people. An awful lot of things that were promoted as short term suffering for some people to make life better for everone (that remained) turned out to be long on the suffering and short on the "better".
So here's my thinking about an alternate plan:
What if we moved forward in a way that both advances the tech and also doesn't force suffering on people? This is possible.
There is no evidence that any of your promises, maybes and coulds are anything but words, and as such you are gambling other people's lives. The idea that "maybe we can help people in the future if we hurt them now" is merely a delusion without evidence, a lie those that hurt people on a whim tell themselves to justify and hide their true motives.