Regulating early means just delaying abundance by 5 to 10 more years or maybe more.
I don't like to build something that will become useless due to AI after a few years. Let it advance to ASI (no need to release publicly) and then let everybody think about making it safe and aligned, then release.
I'm that simple.
What do you think?
Self-selected ignorance and scrambling seem both correlated and causative.
That said, SOTA machines can't run an office snack bar yet, so it'll be a minute before abundances other than caution.
I believe that because AI is learning human experiences, it will help with verifiable work.
Anything that can have outcomes or metrics well defined as true success criteria will enable AI to be able to help easier than other tasks (like writing). The easier the outcomes or metrics definition needed for success in a field, the better and faster we will see AI help in those fields.
The big example is coding.
You're saying that we ask the ASI for "abundance" and everyone gets a mansion in silicon valley and doesn't need to work unless they want to? That doesn't seem like a realistic thing to be thinking about.
My view is that ASI could be created and benchmarked to know that it reached that level of intelligence.
Once we have that, we must sit to talk about abundance to define where to implement it and at what rate in full details.
It's like creating the magic tool to do anything, but we decide what to do with it.
But that is the ideal state that may seem far away, only time will tell how far it is.
I see it not that far due to this simple fact: AI is learning human experiences.
Note: this needs fully functioning robotics as well (software + hardware level intelligence).
Not pausing means more people knowing truths of everything faster in this world.
One of them, that I'm very excited about, is science & research.