Wouldn't not bothering to learn anything be the optimal thing to do due to the fact that almost all mental work will...

Wouldn't not bothering to learn anything be the optimal thing to do due to the fact that almost all mental work will soon be done by A.i?

No and no.

I see what you did there.

>Wouldn't not bothering to learn anything be the optimal thing to do due to the fact that almost all mental work will soon be done by A.i?

So you are fine with being left behind in the world were mathematicians, computer scientists, engineers and businesspeople are an objectively superior class to literally everyone else?

Then sure, go for it. I'm already working in automatization and if you are not also in here then you are bound to become literally poorer than dirt. And that is fine for me, I don't give a fuck about you.

You didn't answer the question. You also seem to be assuming that the only people who will benefit from such a situation are mathematicians, computer scientists, engineers and business people.

Would you also condemn people who aren't intelligent enough to offer any significant contribution to the future development of a.i to a life of poverty?

>mathematicians, computer scientists, engineers and businesspeople are an objectively superior class to literally everyone else?
Given the current state of robotics, AI would have the most advantage in this white collar work. Hiring a human to be a mathematician would be like hiring a chimpanzee. The future of humans is blue collar work.

>giving up intellectual improvement and enrichment based on the idea that A.I's will make humanity useless to itself.

Who else would benefit from these?

The workers of the big and medium sized companies that provide automatization, and the owners of the companies. Those are the only people who will get any subtantial wealth.

I am not condemning anyone, you are condemning yourself. OP literally wants to stay stupid and I have no problem with his decision to stay stupid.

But to the point, people who are not intelligent enough to start a business in automatization or to work "behind" the automatization then you are obviously going to be poor. Unless you are born rich and have the option of buying a million dollar of stock in these companies, I suppose.

To the general topic, I've had superiors tell me that the peak of automatization is to have all businesses automatized up to a 70%, the rest must be left to human hands.

Any business who automatizes less than 70% of their process (whatever it is) will be inneficient and lose to more efficient comapnies, and those businesses that automatize beyond 70% will be to prone to error and the one something glitches up their business wil die.

That means that as we get better at this, there will be a time where the job market is only 30% of what it is today, while the other 70% is done by machines.

So you either become that really high skilled worker that will probably be low paid so that you become part of the 30%, or you get the skills necessary to be the guy making the machines.

>Given the current state of robotics, AI would have the most advantage in this white collar work. Hiring a human to be a mathematician would be like hiring a chimpanzee. The future of humans is blue collar work.

Oh, I forgot.

You most notice that I am not saying AI and instead I'm saying automatization. That is because I am actually knowledgeable in this business and I know what the fuck is up, you retard.

There is no AI coming to get us, there is just automatization. Anyone who believes otherwise is absolutely retarded.

>inb4 why

refer to the 70% "law" I described in my last post.

i'm not that guy but if they have the attitude of op then yes

>saging an other shitty thread

What of the companies pay a automization tax, so fires employees can get a basic imcome.

Literally every business will profit hardcore unless some laws are put in place to slow down the rate of automation. And its not like you're just going to have millions of dollars fall in your lap.

Nothing just happens and somehow benefits you significantly. It requires your interaction. Especially something like a roboindustrial revolution. Simply being an engineer is not enough. You can be the best goddamned engineer in the world, but if you don't have the connections and people to fund your work, you might as well be a janitor. You have to work towards knowing the people that might start such a revolution. Microsoft and Apple soared out of the computer revolution because they had people with excellent business skills AND people with good engineering skills. Not because they were there first. There are plenty of washed up companies from the beginning of computers that were in the business of computers at the time of their major takeoff.

>There is no AI coming to get us, there is just automatization
Exactly. There is no AI coming to get us, just rich CEOs with AI coming to get us.

There are people that unironically believe their profession can't/won't be automated/outsourced to a.i.

But user, we're pretty sure P does not equal NP.

its the optimal excuse for why you decided to study history instead of STEM.

no, i am not going to stop studying science because "if an AI is developed it will learn all of this in half a femtosecond :^)". thats just retarded.

>its the optimal excuse for why you decided to study history instead of STEM

But i didn't though.........................................................

Source

I'm pretty sure it is. the axiom of choice allows you to choose N=1.

yes.