So why exactly is this whole AI business not going to fuck everyone up the pooper exept a select few (no you are not one of them)? Surveillance and fighting robots are already a thing, and sigularity-steroids aren't going to make them less of a threat to everyone (again, exept the few people at the top).
Pic unrelated
tinfoil hat bruh
Since Snowden this point is void bruh
It absolutely will, and the best part is that everyone is going to deny that it's happening until it's already too late.
>is this whole AI business not going to fuck everyone up the pooper
Sexbots are coming and you WILL be happy with them.. and if being fucked up the pooper is your thing then feel free to enjoy
>Sexbots are coming
Superhuman AI yes. Sexbots no.
That is unless you like sticking your dick in the uncanny valley.
"Sexbots" are already partly there. Name is Internet porn. And don't tell me you did not already spend excessive amounts of time on it. Combine it with legalization of drugs and the brave new world is here.
This pains me even more since I have aspirations to become an AI researcher (dying sucks and this seems the only path around it). How the fuck do we not create the superhuman dragondildo destined to destroy our own cavities?
I also don't think that "creating friendly AI" is the problem. AI will be an obedient pet of the power elite, and no one seems to be bothering to tearing their position down. Because american fuckwads are not plebs but temporarily inconvenienced billionaires, you see? And everyone else doesn't even dare to think about it in fear of droning. Freedom!
See here we have a true singularity thread and that singularity chart posting user is not doing his job. Instead he's been posting his image in non-singularity tech threads like a faggot.
Maybe we can salvage this loss with a round of Bingo?
What charts? I don't know them but want to. Charts GET?
This one. He kept posting it in unrelated tech threads when anyone talked about future technology of any kind.
>Computer Science Jobs
kek
Well, I don't really believe that the blue line is going to happen that quickly or steadily, but wound not exclude the possibility all together either. We already have stuff that was considered scifi 20 years ago, and when it is good enough to be applied onto itself it is not unreasonable to expect some drastic changes. No, not everyone and everything becomes computronium in the matrioschkabrain, but still awesome shit.
It is a troll image, what do you expect?
>So why exactly is this whole AI business not going to fuck everyone up the pooper
Lowers overall costs when anything is just determined by maintetnance and capital cost.
Also a lot of cutting edge AI is commercial profit driven projects and not CIA mind control projects.
Pretty funny the humanistic branches of science that always get shit on (e.g. psychology) will be some of the last jobs to be replaced by robots.
Im a teacher so i feel pretty safe. Most of mainstream society wouldnt be comfortable with a robot teaching their kids. Until the traditional school system is abolished and kids learn from home via self guided learning, i think im sweet.
With collapse of your tax base due to rampant automation of jobs. The first public jobs always cut are teachers.
Teachers are going to get replaced with youtube videos and japanese style cram schools. There will "aides" in the classrooms mostly unemployed ex teachers hired at dramatically reduced salary and benefits.
"The Future: A guide."
Are you rich?
-> Yes. Congrats! You'll live a long happy life and secure thanks to automated security drones and the finest doctors which are mostly diagnostic AI software like Watson.
->No. You will in a virtual hellscape of misery and poverty competing for table scraps with the other 10 billion poors on this planet.
What is rich in your opinion?
Also: What will happen when/if capitalism finally collapses?
>Also: What will happen when/if what we understand as an economy ceases to exist?
ftfy, economies are based on scarcity, in any form of post-scarcity there is no longer an economy. This includes situations where no one wants for anything (what singularity enthusiasts dream of), or where there's no reasonable way to obtain what you need (worst-case cyberpunk apocalypse).
There's no in-between when we're talking about an actual singularity. Any economy, capitalist or feudal or communitarian, whatever needs a difference in production potential and need. Bob hunts deer and needs shoes, Joe makes shoes but can't hunt, Bob gives Joe some leather and meat so that Joe can make Bob some shoes and have some food, basic exchange of goods and services. No one can produce everything, because production has cost. But in a true Singularity, everything needed can be produced by anyone, so the need for even the basic idea of an economy is eliminated.
What effect that has depends on a lot of specifics we don't know, and it's also debatable whether this "true singularity" can or will occur at all. But just know that when you say "capitalism finally collapses", don't use some meme marxist definition, say "the system of exchange of goods and services collapses".
I don't know why, but I hear "capitalism needs exponential growth to function". Is that false?
Not exactly. Our interest-driven system does, because the banks only function when they're "creating" new "wealth", which necessitates expansion of capital. But a capitalist system, that is to say the free association and exchange of goods and services, can certainly function without this system of "wealth" expansion, at least there's no reason why it can't in theory. But banking as we understand it has existed within every advanced non-command economy, so how a system without it would be able to expand but not *require* expansion is something I'm really not equipped to answer.
But to answer your question, no, capitalism doesn't inherently require growth, but our current system does, to some extent. But most of the time when you hear "capitalism", the speaker means "a slightly exaggerated version of our current system which could be described as semi-capitalistic", marxists love to associate these two things to convince people that capitalism is inherently bad, but that's a different topic.
Ok, thank you. But what I mean is also "our interest-driven system" - What will happen if it collapses? On the one hand I think to be a real capitalist (as in I get money for having money) I need interest which depends on growth, on the other I can also imagine a stationary system where some people still own enough means of production to feed themselves without actually working. A hole in this idea is where they actually get the money to pay their slaves - but with enough automated law enforcement, they probably can make up some bullshit reason and go fully neofeudalism.
How likely do you think new markets are? I came up with the following:
-bring Afrika towards 1st-world-niveau
-wars and generally breaking and rebuilding shit
-singularitarian markets
-status symbols will always sell since they are relative and just a sacrifice of wealth to show your superiority (might not be enough though - there is already the consumers-are-cucks-meme)
>What will happen if it collapses?
expansion of wealth hits 0
>where some people still own enough means of production to feed themselves without actually working
unless you grow your own food and have enough extra to sell for basic supplies, this isn't possible. But you could still call farming your own crops "working", as you could performing or any other profession where the average person could technically produce their own wealth without notable production costs.
>slaves
you don't pay slaves, you own them. Or are you spouting the marxist meme where paid employees are called slaves? They're much closer to peasants than serfs or slaves, if you want to try and draw that comparison.
>they probably can make up some bullshit reason and go fully neofeudalism
I have no idea what you mean by this
>bring Afrika towards 1st-world-niveau
might work, but advancement doesn't halt everywhere else while the third world catches up, it'll be behind and consuming outdated and second-hand tech products for a while.
>wars and generally breaking and rebuilding shit
see Broken Window Fallacy
>singularitarian markets
explain
>status symbols
no reason a human is required to produce these
>expansion of wealth hits 0
And then? How do the capital owners stay on top?
> this isn't possible
Of course it is, by owning shit. Hey, you can farm my land and keep half and I get the other -> free food.
> are you spouting the marxist meme where paid employees are called slaves?
Yes.
>They're much closer to peasants
True. Still sucks.
> I have no idea what you mean by this
I mean a system where one class works for the other because the latter has a monopoly on violence. Yes I am aware that technically feudalism is something else, just wanted to draw the parallel to the middle ages.
> Broken Window Fallacy
I don't argue that it will give a net benefit to society but keep the system running. Imo there are needs created today per advertising which would not exist otherwise. Again status symbols come to mind.
>explain
New needs created by new technological possibilities, especially concerning the intelligence race.
>no reason a human is required to produce these
Already today people pay extra for hand-crafted shit. But the point was that new markets might prevent the collapse of the current system, not that humans will not be obsolete.
Why do they keep trying to recover them with skin ?
That's skin the problem ! Don't they see !?
Go for the blatant robot look and instead focus on facial expression, fine motor movement and decent AI.
I mean, look at that fine piece of junk.
Don't tell me you don't want to put your dick in it.