The Reality of Universal Basic Income Future

Submitted by Prototype47 t3_zo4zlu in Futurology

In relation to this AI situation, I see many people, especially in this sub reddit, are talking about Universal Basic Income (UBI). Mistakenly believing that this shift that started in society with AIs is just a temporary “bad thing”, a mild inconvenience. People who believe in UBI, seem to be very convinced that this AI Thing - is their ticket into a free life of UIB, a heaven, where they’ll have an ability to focus on their hobbies, and passions and won’t have to work a day in their life ever again.

Well I got bad news for you here. This “heaven”, you are so desperately trying to imagine for yourselves, is in fact going to be your worst nightmare. And the severity of it is going to bypass the nuclear apocalypse, the “Skynet” apocalypse or a virus based apocalypse. Because those things, as much as awful they are, they are all relatively quick for the majority of the human population. Yeah, maybe 0.001% of us might be able to last longer in these scenarios, but the majority will be gone pretty quick. We won’t have to endure it for a prolonged amount of time.

So why is it not what it seems to be?

Well…, here is the thing, my fellow human. We, humans, have evolved as social creatures. We do things for our societies not because it is “a right thing” to do, not because it is something that “ the society needs”. No. We do it because we want to stand out among our peers. We want to be appreciated and recognized and respected.

Now let’s look at the UBI scenario.

The world is dominated by AIs, where everything meaningful is produced procedurally by AIs and humans are no longer needed. You think you are going to have a hobby and get to do your own things in this scenario? Really? Nobody would care! You can learn to paint, sing or write music. But it’s not going to be recognized or even seen in the world where every second AI generates million more pieces. So what are you going to do? You're going to sit in a VR headset on a couch just like everyone else, drooling to some porn that is generated in real time specifically tailored for your tastes. You are not going to raise your children, because if you at that point would even want to have them, very soon they are going to end up just like anyone else. And no, they are not gonna go to school, or anywhere else. Because what’s the point? How are you going to motivate them to learn, even to write and read? “Hey son, if you won’t study you’ll be on the streets!” - “Yeah dad, so what? We have UBI. I don't need to do anything!”

And there we all will be, cows that eat, shit and sleep and consume entertainment non stop.

But it’s not going to end there, my friend. It’ll be the first 5, maybe 10 years. And when everyone will get so lazy, so complacent, so unmotivated to even move their fat bodies to fart in an opposite direction for a change, these “big corporations” are going to stop producing and supplying everyone. Because why would they continue? What would be the point? People would rise up and go protesting? No they wouldn't, because they wouldn't even be able to wipe their own asses by themselves, cause they’d need a robot to do so.

And that is going to be humanity: fat, diseased, unable to speak, or write or read, feeding through a tube at specified hours of the day, slowly dying out.

Road to hell is paved with good intentions. Or, to be more precise to the current situation, this road is paved with positive hopes.

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

eikons t1_j0lazje wrote

> You think you are going to have a hobby and get to do your own things in this scenario? Really? Nobody would care! You can learn to paint, sing or write music. But it’s not going to be recognized or even seen in the world where every second AI generates million more pieces.

"You won't have a hobby because AI does your hobby better than you" is such a preposterous premise that I'm amazed you posted this thing without catching yourself. We're already there in so many fields and reality is proving you wrong time and time again.

Cameras do realism better and a million times faster than the best realism painter. Yet there are realism painters.

A good set of headphones or speakers provide you with the best version of the best songs you like. You can watch movies at home with brilliant sound and effects. Yet people watch live performances.

Guns made archery obsolete. Yet archery lives. Heck, almost every sport is an emulation of something we no longer (need to) do. Still people watch the olympics where we throw spears and discs and run and jump and swim. And people do all these things at every level of competition, even knowing they will never make money off it. So who the fuck cares of a boston dynamics robot will eventually outrun the best marathon runner? It would do NOTHING to the sport.

Look at the state of Chess and Go. These games can be played at unattainable levels by AI, yet the sports are as healthy as they've ever been. Even with the recent incident.

Hobbies, almost by definition, aren't practiced to compete with commercial output. They are first and foremost something to entertain yourself. With some hobbies, impressing others is a big part of that. When I watch someone perform, whatever skill it is that I'm appreciating, I'm enjoying the experience of watching a person do that, knowing what time and talent it took for them to get there.

I could keep listing examples but if you think about it, nearly EVERY HOBBY WE DO TODAY is an example that proves you wrong.

293

Ok-Crab-4063 t1_j0nkf3s wrote

I agree, OP sounds like he is one of the examples he's talking about. People don't appreciate art or "think it's only to stand out" as some gross type of social construct. People have lost taste and desire for intricacies of art and music because THERE IS NO TIME TO. But when you do get pretty good at one of these things you appreciate how great it is. How many levels there is to it.

But it's easy to think what he's thinking if he assumes people are exactly as the people you see in the movie Idiocracy.

The crap AI spits out can't be differentiated a lot of the time due to the ambiguity of art. I've always been a fan of art that has strong, clear messages. What I enjoy can't be emulated without much more sophistication (purely originally comedy, I still haven't seen be synth'd by AI).

To regain this ability to appreciate real life you need to steal your time back.

It's a fact about life, trauma, and adverse conditions. You lose your appreciation for higher brain activities when you are always struggling to provide just the basic needs. Not a lot of very hungry people are reading Shakespeare.

25

PhAiLMeRrY t1_j0nuwp3 wrote

Absolutely, I could not agree more. OP is projecting and guess what... he is EXACTLY the type of POS who IS going to turn into a fat useless blob and fade away.. doesn't appreciate anything for the sake of it's beauty, only it's value and reward.

AI isn't the problem, UBI isn't the problem, Hell even the rich and powerful aren't the problem..

The true evil in this world is the value system OP is projecting.

14

troma-midwest t1_j0mz7ue wrote

I’m all for that tailored porn though, that would save me so many scrolling hours I can dedicate to my unAIthievable hobby of cave drawings of AI themed porn. Just like our ancestors.

11

crooked-v t1_j0oh8kd wrote

Also, the millions and millions of people who write heartfelt yet really shitty fanfiction of their favorite series say hello.

2

SCP-Agent-Arad t1_j0ou0yb wrote

“But a million monkeys on typewriters will eventually write all fanfiction, so why bother?”

~OP

2

me_too_999 t1_j0o2b3x wrote

Yeah, no.

99.99999% of us will sit on the couch, and smoke weed, just like today.

1

LuckyCSGO t1_j0mikxv wrote

I’ve seen this argument a few times, it would make sense if AI was a similar to the camera, speaker, or a new weapon. Truthfully AI is all of the these improvements you speak of combined 100 fold. AI causes advancements in all fields and AI implementations are going to be easy and free to use. Picture the ultimate search engine, search engine doesn’t even describe it correctly. Without AI currently a student googling the answer to one of their homework questions may hope to find the answer from one a service like Chegg. With AI in the VERY near future that same student can ask AI to solve the entire 5 page homework assignment and generate a cheat sheet for the upcoming test based on the homework assignment. AI will take under 10 seconds to complete this request. ChatGPT is already capable of this although not 100% accurate. Need to build a website for your storefront? AI will generate one with entirely unique visuals. Need to understand a medical issue with your body? AI will be able to take information from you and give you extremely accurate diagnostic information. At this rate of improvement you are too confident in the human urge to independently create and have hobbies. This is not the same thing as the fine artist discovering the camera, it’s going to change everything we do.

Source: me, beep boop computer science guy using AI on the regular

−10

StingyAddict t1_j0n6zo5 wrote

There's a significant difference between 'doing something right' and 'doing something for enjoyment'.
If we need something done 'right', we can just have an AI shit that out.
However, you seem to miss the point that we are intentionally doing pointless things, not because it can be 'done better' or 'done well' by us, but because we, ourselves, want to do them.
For Art, money is not the motivation, it's the limiting factor.
Why do people go to the gym when they have cars? Because they want to feel strong and get fit.
Why do people make food when they could get it from a restaurant?
Because they want to either customize what they eat or feel the satisfaction of having made food.
Even if AI can give us 'better' everything than we, ourselves, can produce, they'll never be able to give us a better feeling of satisfaction from accomplishing something with our own two hands.

7

LuckyCSGO t1_j0nac5k wrote

Not missing any points, I didn’t say everyone won’t have hobbies. My point isn’t that we only do things and pursue hobbies with the sole purpose of efficiency. The urge to do things with our own two hands will slowly fade for the majority. Creating digital art is fun but less fun when your cohorts are able to generate better art in seconds. Hobbies will in general produce less enjoyment for humans because whether you like it or not a huge part of enjoying a hobby for most is being acknowledged for it. Custom digital art will look like the millions of generated images anyone can make and therefor there will be less acknowledgement of talent. AI will disrupt life more than a lot of you know, please listen to computer scientists. We are building these tools, 80% of us know the outcomes and heed warning against continuing.

−4

StingyAddict t1_j0nbb89 wrote

I feel that that is less so a product of AI, and more so a product of the internet in general. Comparison is the thief of joy, and all that.

However, that's just a fact of life. The best is a superlative thing. The only thing you can do is to be better than the you that existed previously. This isn't an issue that can be solved by anything, or even ruined by AI. It's an issue that stems entirely from trying to compete with others on how good what you make is. If you're only doing a hobby to be acknowledged by your peers, then your hobby is ultimately something that can be replaced by anything, since you're only doing it to 'be special'.

There's only one gold medalist in every race, and only one tallest mountain in the world. This is a fact of life that people eventually have to deal with. However, the difference is that with a future where human survival is guaranteed, not by any due paid to a corporate overlord, we will be able to live with this fact, rather than let it crush us. How many people give up on their dreams because they just don't have the time, or wouldn't make enough money doing what they actually want to do? How many would be spared from that despair?

Sure. I already accepted a long time ago that, in the grand scheme of things, I'll never be some genius inventor that turns Mars into a Gaia world or builds cities at the bottom of the ocean. I can't write or draw or sing well enough to win any awards for it.

But I sing in my car, and I write my little stories. Not because I need to. Not because I think I can do it better. Not because someone will acknowledge me for them.

I'm just doing it for fun. And in the end, that's all anything anyone wants to do.

4

LuckyCSGO t1_j0nlzov wrote

I mean you can beat around the bush of my argument by completely changing the wording of “a large part of hobbies is acknowledgment of talent” to “only doing a hobby to be special is bad”. And honestly that’s the smallest point out of all my arguments I made. Notice how you didn’t even address the points made about digital artisan hobbyists ? It’s a pretty fucking hard point to refute, an entire industry is being destroyed and the hobby will most certainly be less enjoyable (source: the millions of digital artists complaining on the internet). You don’t really see my point and you are more wrapped up by the semantics. You and most people in this thread are horribly wrong about AI and don’t know it yet but hey maybe 4-8 years in the future you can come back here and be like “oh shit that’s what he meant”

−2

StingyAddict t1_j0nn3lk wrote

The primary concerns with digital AI art isn't hobbyists, it's copyright infringement. AI Art replaces an industry "art creation" with AI that does it for cheaper, and abuses publicly available artwork in order to do so. They're stealing other people's hardwork in order to also take their jobs from them. I didn't feel the need to refute this point, because no one will care nearly as much about copyright if their livelihoods aren't being threatened.

As for "completely changing the wording of “a large part of hobbies is acknowledgment of talent” to “only doing a hobby to be special is bad”.", your entire argument is founded on humans only doing hobbies only to have their talents acknowledged.

But if you want an direct example of it all, just look at like, Youtube, or anything else. You'll never stack up to the top channels, so why bother? Because they want to create content for other people to consume, and they do want to be acknowledged, even if it isn't as being the best. Hobbyists competing against AI in a field as subjective as art probably won't feel any real pressure from AI, unless that AI is being pumped by big time corporations or something.

The threat of AI isn't AI itself, it's the people who own it. I'm not really sure where we're even standing against each other at this point, but I'm pretty sure my position is "AI is a tool in the hands of people who would abuse it" and my goals are "prevent this abuse" and "ensure everyone can benefit from AI".

4

LuckyCSGO t1_j0qie35 wrote

If you’re understanding of the greatest issue with digital AI art is simply copyright infringement then I can’t talk to you sorry. You’re obviously a digital artist and lost in the copium, goodluck my boi. The future is here

1

Ok-Crab-4063 t1_j0nns3d wrote

But they can't go outside the bounds of what you tell it right? They can't rationalize the true cause of. Medical issue that's not understood by humans yet.

For example: comedy...I haven't seen that yet but if I did I would shit myself. (I mean it would have to make something completely original, not piecing other crap together that's already funny)

2

FeatheryBallOfFluff t1_j0kwtol wrote

Oh no, another non-expert thinking it knows exactly how things will work out. Most people would be pretty bored doing nothing at all with their lives. As long as people are curious, people will work on science, volunteer, build stuff and create stuff. That's why you see businessmen, rockstars, designers and other artists still work even if they have enough money to never work a day in their life again. People like to feel useful.

Also don't underestimate social pressure (what society thinks being "succesful" means)

143

anglesideside1 t1_j0l8x34 wrote

You’d think we would have learned that lesson during the pandemic. The vast majority of people did things you mentioned while we were forced to be isolated from one another. Sure, some people probably stayed home and played video games all day by themselves, but the vast majority of us were bored and did whatever we could to feel useful.

29

StanielBlorch t1_j0lrgdy wrote

>the vast majority of us were bored and did whatever we could to feel useful.

I learned to knit. Made my own scarves for winter and my god am I happy with the results. Went way overboard. The extras? Given away to friends and family and the stuff that was still left over went to Goodwill.

I tutored my step-brother's son with algebra and his daughter with chemistry.

OP's outlook is just sad.. I hope they get help.

7

giantsteps92 t1_j0lhfy0 wrote

This. A big difference would be the ability to socialize. So if you learned music, you could go and play with your friends (unlike lockdowns).

6

Gubekochi t1_j0ljv9f wrote

To be honest being an adult with time to maintain my friendships sounds like heaven on earth.

12

passwordsarehard_3 t1_j0m58wd wrote

The only thing stopping it is greed.

4

Gubekochi t1_j0m6tks wrote

Not mine, nor theirs. For years I worked 4 days a week because my employer would allow it and I valued my free time more than actual money. But at the same time, I'd like to be able to save for retirement and nice things like 1.6 children or something...

The greed of the capitalist/owner/bourgeois class though... now we're talking!

2

DeckardPain t1_j0mdx5t wrote

For real. Another doomer thread that totally misses the entire psychology of society in 2022.

You will get bored with no job for longer than 6-12 months. Jobs aren’t just about earning money. They keep you busy, engaged, and feel like you’re contributing in some way. Obviously shitty work environments can degrade this, but the point still stands.

I also work with AI somewhat regularly as a software engineer. This shit isn’t replacing any jobs in the near future. The art ones especially. They just steal and combine. Mega copyright issues that nobody is going to touch.

3

DCSMU t1_j0npa9i wrote

Yeah, what's up with all the angsty AI doom and gloom on here today?

Also, why can't I see this guy's recent post history, am I making some noob mistake? I dont usually check such things, but given the frequency of posts like these hitting my feed today, I figured I should start looking.

3

SCP-Agent-Arad t1_j0ou4y7 wrote

I feel like all these dystopia fetishists think we’re going to do a time jump 100 years into the future, and simply don’t consider anything in the intervening time.

1

Surur t1_j0kxgbp wrote

No, he is right. If UBI is enabled by AGI/ASI, then "people will work on science, volunteer, build stuff and create stuff" will be unnecessary.

Whatever you can do, could be done more easily and better by an AGI.

Ironically the best thing the ASI could do was put everyone in the matrix, where they pretend to live meaningful lives.

−20

FeatheryBallOfFluff t1_j0kykz1 wrote

Highly unlikely. A scientist still needs to guide AI to make it search in the right direction. You can tell AI "Find me the best binding proteins with this protein of interest, binding epitope X", and AI may find you the best one, but someone still has to do something with that information and how to apply it.

Then there is research on things that are hard for a robot to understand. A lot of research in ecology is barely significant, but biologically relevant. A human may understand why something is biologically relevant, AI as it stands now is uncapable of doing so.

What AI can do though, is optimize plant growth parameters, so energy requirements go down, while food security increases. So essentially, it would be possible to eventually feed the population with very little labour, and so we can focus on other tasks that further improve our lives (hint: science).

AGI as it stands, is decades, if not centuries away. But let's for a second assume it is, why wouldn't humans collaborate with AGI to find new scientific results?

10

Surur t1_j0l3xsp wrote

If AIs can understand protein folding better than humans, I think it is pretty obvious those higher level abstractions are also tractible, especially complex things like ecology. I would bet AI would be much better at understanding ecology than us.

There is very little sign AGI is centuries away, and decades go past pretty fast.

−2

FeatheryBallOfFluff t1_j0l6723 wrote

AIs can predict, but that isn't equal to understanding why or how it works. It's like being able to apply a very complex formula. You may know how to apply the formula, but may not understand why the formula is like that. Computers are good at finding correlations, but in an environment with little correlations, AI may have difficulty, as there is no number that indicates biological relevance.

1

Surur t1_j0l6tj8 wrote

Finding the relationship between items is exactly what AI is good at. You sound like the people who said AI would never beat Go because the number of combinations were more than the atoms in the universe.

−1

breaditbans t1_j0l9qc4 wrote

I work in medical research. We are already seeing cool image based analysis, but it’s supervised machine learning that is only as good as the training set. This will apply to any machine learning algos. And that’s where we are going to run into issues. What I’d like to see in ML algos that can read 50 high impact papers in a field and put together a summary of the data. The problems arise when people have bad data. It might be fabricated, poorly designed expts or just bad statistics. The ML algos are going to assume that data is as real as the most well-performed experiments. The bad data will contaminate the good data and corrupt the conclusions drawn from the algos.

Will that problem get alleviated? Probably, but it’s going to take some time and it’s going to require a lot of bright people to curate the dataset to actually be able to draw better conclusions than we can arrive at alone. But in 15 years? God only knows. Maybe I’ll just submit whatever grant ChatGPT13 writes for me.

2

Surur t1_j0ld4s8 wrote

Dealing with dirty data is exactly the strength of neural networks. It is just a matter of time.

1

Yokono666 t1_j0wtrvs wrote

You're missing the point of human creativity. There doesn't have to be a purpose. The purpose is the process. AI can't replicate the experience of learning a skill over years and deriving pleasure from engaging in it.

1

gmoney1259 t1_j0l58iz wrote

AI will present problems for humanity. AI will present opportunities for humanity.

130

amortellaro t1_j0lknc2 wrote

Most likely accurate and level-headed statement I’ve read lately. Why can’t we leave it at that? I’ve read too many drastic and specific predictions by folks who are too confident about the future.

37

radicalceleryjuice t1_j0mcprj wrote

Because concern is warranted and required for ensuring safety. There are many top AI people who are concerned about how this could go badly.

Some people are way to sure about doom forecasting, but the dangers are too real to just leave it at “there will be some good stuff and some bad stuff.”

Same for the environment. If things work out ok, it will be because a lot of people expressed grave concerns. The situation with the environment does warrant a bit of noise.

…anyway, hard to know where the line is. But since some of the concern is coming from the very people building these systems, yes let’s be helpfully concerned. (But also a little optimistic)

11

amortellaro t1_j0mhuu4 wrote

That’s fair, I think I feel bombarded with the worst predictions on Reddit lately, but I in no way am proposing not to be critical and wary of advancements in AI.

I sincerely hope that openAI’s stated goals of safe AI development are never cast to the wayside, and imagine that’s part of this public trial run with chatGPT

4

radicalceleryjuice t1_j0mizzj wrote

Ok we’re on the same page. But note that OpenAI Has an “alignment problem” team and they certainly think we should be concerned (also excited). Also it took less than 24 hours for people to trick chatGPT into being evil.

I think we’re approaching an “all hands on deck” situation, where we need a whole lot of people to realize that things can work out, but only if we work together

3

anglesideside1 t1_j0l9a9b wrote

We’ve lived through an industrial revolution already. Sure there were socialist movements and luddites who hated the machines, but for the most part we all adapted to those new opportunities. It’ll happen again.

20

StanielBlorch t1_j0lruw0 wrote

I think OPs desired solution to this ghastly situation of people not having to labor for the profit of their betters would be the same as the Victorians came up with: the workhouse.

10

radicalceleryjuice t1_j0mbmxf wrote

The Luddites didn’t hate all machines, they only hated machines that were designed to deskill the working classes.

6

anglesideside1 t1_j0mdzbj wrote

Dey took ‘er jahbs!!!

1

smooshie t1_j0mpdhg wrote

And if they had succeeded in their goals, everyone but themselves would be worse off for it.

1

radicalceleryjuice t1_j0ms62k wrote

How so? Do you know what their goals were? They wanted to have a say in how technology was being designed. How would that make things worse?

2

spellbanisher t1_j0nc8zd wrote

>We’ve lived through an industrial revolution already.

Your direct ancestors did, but hundreds of millions did not. To obtain food for its urban populations, as well as raw materials, Great Britain and other European countries created colonies around the world. Recent estimates have found that British colonialism (again, driven by industrial revolution) caused 165 million excess deaths in India from 1880-1920, and life expectancy declined from 27 to 22 years. That's a lot of people who didn't live through it.

Even in western countries the industrial revolution was brutal for most people who went through it. In the United States life expectancy declined from 44 to 37 years between 1790 and 1860. Again, a lot of people who didn't live through it.

Eventually society may adapt (although the past is a terrible predictor of the future), but we don't have to let the AI revolution decimate several generations. It took a lot of activism, organizing, and political struggle to make industrial society humane for most people: decolonization, the municipalization of sanitation, the regulation of working conditions, the universalization of education, the creation of welfare states. As anthropologist Karl Polanyi argued in The Great Transformation, the commodification of land and labor tends towards their annihilation. It was countermovements to commodification which made industrial society broadly livable.These things didn't just happen. People had to struggle and fight for it..

This is why the deterministic attitude towards AI is so detrimental. It makes people think that, hey, things will just work out because they did in the past, ignoring that people in the past fought to make things work out because they didn't assume that they simply would.

5

anglesideside1 t1_j0nhmba wrote

Oh people are definitely going to die in any transition. Never said it wasn’t going to be easy. People thinking we can just sit around and get paid is the fallacy in all of this. Sorry…we’re all actually surviving here. It just doesn’t feel that way because our lives are so cushy thanks to all of our modern amenities and amazing infrastructure.

1

gza_liquidswords t1_j0oe3y5 wrote

>Sure there were socialist movements

You should read about socialist movement, and how they eliminated child labor, provided worker safety protections, 40 hour work week, overtime protections etc etc

0

blackperch t1_j0n44v3 wrote

[Insert ______ revolution] will present challenges and will also present opportunities for humanity.

2

LuckyCSGO t1_j0mjkol wrote

It’s not this simple, the opportunities AI presents will be the problems it presents.

1

Chuckobochuck323 t1_j0mmtz5 wrote

I think the biggest fear is how much control AI will take from humanity. If we’re talking about true AGI, that will be the dawn of a new species. A species with a greater potential than humanity. We are basically creating our replacements.

0

flexr123 t1_j0mrzbj wrote

Seriously you guys are just imagining lots of bs limitless possibilities, ignoring the fact AI processing power is limited by its hardware too.

3

Chuckobochuck323 t1_j0msgyf wrote

Have you ever considered that we are the hardware?

0

flexr123 t1_j0mt2vi wrote

Everytime new AI model comes out people always freak out. I am so tired of this bs. Yes there's gonna be a lot of job loss but mostly entry level. High level jobs require not only human interaction, creativity but also accountability. Those jobs are irreplaceable. Who's gonna take responsibility when shits go wrong? Blame AI lul?

3

Factorless t1_j0nc4lt wrote

False hope. We have to have something that drives us individually. Without something productive to do, AI will either control us to keep us from hurting ourselves, or we delve into a traditional hares natures.

−2

aFoxNamedMorris t1_j0kultb wrote

UBI was never intended to "replace work." It's supposed to be given to everyone regardless of employment status and would be the same sum regardless of other income. You're making an ass of yourself.

87

iusprimaenoctis t1_j0kvv91 wrote

Reads like a boomer's or early gen x neocon's temper tantrum.

39

TheCrimsonDagger t1_j0l6qom wrote

Yeah, this just screams someone who is a workaholic to me. The idea that someone has to have a traditional job to be productive and socially active is incredibly shortsighted. Anything that makes someone feel fulfilled and gives them a purpose is “work”. It doesn’t matter if that is building birdhouses, speedrunning video games, or manually filling out excel spreadsheets.

16

StanielBlorch t1_j0lt0eo wrote

>The idea that someone has to have a traditional job to be productive and socially active is incredibly shortsighted.

Calvinism is the root cause of many a case of misanthropic brain worms.

10

anglesideside1 t1_j0l93c0 wrote

Socialism is a term thrown around too much these days, but that’s literally the definition of socialism.

−1

iusprimaenoctis t1_j0mloos wrote

Is it though? My understanding of socialism would be how a convent functions where wealth is distributed evenly. UBI simply adds a poverty 'floor', people are free to pursue greater personal wealth.

4

cloudrunner69 t1_j0kwoux wrote

One of the biggest problems is people think UBI stands for Universal Basic Income but it stands for Unconditional Basic Income.

7

breaditbans t1_j0lb5h4 wrote

Let’s not be mean about this. IF AI replaces work instead of augmenting work, we will have a lot of unemployed people. But, there will always be work to be done. The AI can’t thread a screw to repair a door knob from 1913. The AI can’t repair a furnace or install insulation. Manual labor is going to be fine.

It’s the administrative assistants that are facing a threat. The middle managers, the accountants and book work people. But these are mostly people with more than two neurons to rub together. They will find other things to do. I suspect we’ll automate the boring stuff and spend our work hours doing the human stuff. Presumably the work hours will be more productive and pay could increase.

0

aFoxNamedMorris t1_j0mezu1 wrote

You are making the assumption that AI (presumably AGI, specifically) will remove all human jobs forever. This is entirely speculative.

2

SCP-Agent-Arad t1_j0ou9t5 wrote

It certainly won’t happen while human labor is cheaper, even if just in the short term. Companies often only care about profits in the next quarter, CEOs don’t tend to care about the success of another CEO 30 years in the future.

1

cloudrunner69 t1_j0kwtsp wrote

>where they’ll have an ability to focus on their hobbies, and passions and won’t have to work a day in their life ever again.

A hobby is work. The word your'e looking for is job.

65

StanielBlorch t1_j0lsnok wrote

How dare people pursue endeavors for the sake of their own fulfillment, rather than labor for the enrichment of their social betters! Degeneracy, I say! Bolshevism! Sheer Bolshevism and blasphemy, I say!

31

Cercy_Leigh t1_j0m9suw wrote

That’s what a life under capitalism does to us, until we take a long hard look at society and the way things are done and compare it to other societies and question the narrative enough that you can see through the capitalist veil, the idea that humans could live without constant labor if resources are obtainable and do things that fulfill us for our lives instead, the concept seems the antithesis to what we are conditioned to. Capitalism told us anything but a 9-5, 5 day a week labor is lazy and makes us worthless to society.

I think society would go back to spending more time in the real world and within the community so we could share our interests and work on community projects. Imagine how creative and innovative we could be when creating our world around us, together, without the pressures of modern capitalist society. We would go from consumers to creators.

9

Prince_of_Old t1_j0mvpzt wrote

Why would we come together as a community to create things if AI can create those same things better? Sure, some people might. But overall why would fictional entertainment that currently dominates people’s free time (series, movies, books, video games) become less dominant as its comparative advantage increases relative to “community-based projects”?

5

Cercy_Leigh t1_j0n13g2 wrote

Because a large number of us will grow tired of the increasingly negative outlooks attitudes and algorithms we’re faced with online and also the inability to make personal connections. I’m taking to you but when we’re done we’ll almost certainly never interact again and if we did we wouldn’t even know it.

We’ll turn to human connections and the biggest impact we can have on creating a peaceful and comfort world to live in is our own communities. AI might be a tool we use and integrate into that world but many will crave working with our hands and creating things. Also an online experience where everything and anything you interact with is possibly or probably ai or ai created rather than humans and marketed to you won’t be desirable. I already take 2 week break after a couple days online and I’m not alone.

Many will immerse themselves into the virtual world and that’s fine but human nature and history says many will reject that entirely.

1

Prince_of_Old t1_j0n1sf2 wrote

You may not be alone in taking those internet breaks but you are in a tiny minority, especially among younger generations.

Why is algorithmic content inherently negative outlook oriented? If people want more positive content, the algorithms will create it. The reason alarmist content is made is because it is effective at keeping people engaged, if that stops being true the content will change.

0

Cercy_Leigh t1_j0nb09v wrote

It does but it needs to be carefully and consciously curated. You also have to know what’s healthy and good for mental health and bad for mental health. Material planted by marketing, domestic propaganda and foreign propaganda or influence doesn’t start off in your feed seeming like anything nefarious. We all are constantly targeted for influence for whatever reason benefits the entity doing it. Sometimes you don’t understand or know your mental outlook or opinion is being manipulated until a long time after or ever.

This is the reality of living in a consumer society and America has manipulated its people long before the internet. What’s negative? What’s positive? Sometimes you don’t know until your behaviors and choices in your life begins to be effected.

The younger generation is online more but as I said, history and human nature have proven time and time again that a portion of us will be effected by the artificial creep very differently. And those of that grew up with the birth of the internet have experience with how tech changes and grows, it’s complete indifference to what effect it has on users and the pitfalls we’ve experienced and why. Good things will come too and amazing innovations and progress and discoveries but it’s about whatever is also going on while you’re playing that you don’t know about. Like using Facebook for instance when they offered it and the running list of damaging and life altering things that was done on purpose like the fact that we lost our anonymity and privacy and everything anyone would want to know was collected and sold to the highest bidder for who knows what purpose. I could go on and on like giving child exploitation a platform to conduct business and a bloody civil war that was started using Facebook by a government that resulted in a massively bloody hand to hand war.

We have peeked into the visions presented to us and also what has leaked out from the tech companies for the next iteration of the web and many many of us don’t have any interest in it; apart from casual use. I have a pretty good idea of what sorts of things they want from us and it’s unfortunately never a better quality of life, unless of course it happens to benefit the corporate or political overlords.

If you’re aware of American history and it’s endless hunger to make profits using the citizens and the endless human rights tragedies that corporate entities were aware they were committing and offer no remorse only denial, you’d know that anything new especially on a large scale better be approached with awareness and caution and sometimes you have to know when to resist.

1

Prince_of_Old t1_j0nixeq wrote

I think what you're saying here supports my original doubt that people will come together as a community to create things. The entertainment industry has a profit motive for keeping people using their entertainment. If people stop wanting negative content, then the entertainment industry will adapt (or the content already that way will become more successful to the same effect). The profit motive, as you describe it, only makes it less likely that we will move away from spending our time online in the future as profit incentives push online entertainment to become more addictive/appealing/exciting/pleasurable or whatever keeps people coming back.

At the end of the day, my worry is that your worldview (as I understand it from our few messages, please correct me if I get something wrong) is not compatible with a future where technology stops progressing. If technology keeps progressing there will be a point where AI can be a better "human" companion than a human (e.g. be like a human perfectly optimized to be your friend). When this point is reached, the idea of a community starts to break down it seems to me. The day will also come when our understanding of the brain is so good that we can cut out the middle man of our senses and stimulate our pleasure centers directly without long-term health effects. Considering that all "good feelings" are combinations of brain chemicals and neural circuits it follows that stimulating the pleasure centers directly is the best way to maximize "good feelings".

2

StanielBlorch t1_j0lqkku wrote

That's an awful lot of words to whine about NOBODY WANTS TO WORK ANYMORE!!!!

​

>You think you are going to have a hobby and get to do your own things in
this scenario? Really? Nobody would care! You can learn to paint, sing
or write music. But it’s not going to be recognized

Yeah, dumbass, that's what hobbies are: things you do for the pleasure of doing them, for your own gratification and personal fulfillment rather than the approval of other people.

​

>And there we all will be, cows that eat, shit and sleep and consume entertainment non stop.

Jesus, the fucking projection.

>And that is going to be humanity: fat, diseased, unable to speak, or
write or read, feeding through a tube at specified hours of the day,
slowly dying out.

Projection intensifies.

This is just sad. Tell me again how much you love humanity by saying that humanity is worthless unless it's reduced to being a beast of burden.

24

agtk t1_j0mh8b9 wrote

I don't understand what's going on with all these blog-entry-style high school essay text posts on this sub lately. I guess they're creating conversation but the level of discourse is lacking when we're arguing about whether AI will replace our hobbies (lol).

6

echotexas t1_j0mjrqj wrote

I especially love that OP took it upon themself to explain in such a condescending manner. It really made me want to absorb their opinion as my own. I, and the way I view and interact with the world I live in, am forever changed.

3

treddit44 t1_j0lbys3 wrote

Another garbage prediction. We already have a sizable depressed overweight population that's addicted to screens. Gyms haven't gone out of business and people still go outside. I love music, there's an unlimited supply of it, I still enjoy watching average people at an open mic night. The variety of food nowadays is off the charts and yet I still enjoy scrambling eggs.

You don't have to look to the future to wrap your mind around all of this. The wealthy already have "robots" to do everyday menial tasks. They have the option to never work another day in their life. Yet mark Cuban is running a basketball team and trying to disrupt the drug industry. Paris Hilton is a dj or something. Donald Trump wants to spend the rest of his life being investigated instead of playing golf.

AI may come with some serious problems but not everyone will lay down and die like you want to. Humans are adaptive creatures with strange ambitions

18

ManHoFerSnow t1_j0lkhxp wrote

Dude I haven't worked for two months and I've been having a blast petting my cat, rock climbing, snowboarding, reading, playing guitar, running, and playing vidya games. I do the activities because they bring me joy. Your post sounds like a you problem

18

TheGratefulJuggler t1_j0lbgln wrote

That was the fastest escalation I could have imagined. In one and half paragraphs we went from the "reality" of UBI to Skynet nightmare scenario. I am just going to step off here.

16

Educational-Leg7464 t1_j0lbhx2 wrote

Lots of rambling to make your point.

Automation is sparking the next stage of our society. Countless technologies will emerge from the automation race.

UBI is really just an eventuality at this point as corporations will have replaced most occupations with technology

15

passwordsarehard_3 t1_j0m7f9f wrote

Morlocks are the eventuality. AI will make the rich insanely rich but manual labor will still be needed. Society’s advancement will create a paradise for those at the top and a fiendish hellscape for those at the bottom. UBI will be the food and housing needed not to die but it won’t be enough to live on, the rich won’t allow a system like that to exist long enough to take root.

2

K_H007 t1_j0mt4up wrote

Right up until their short-sightedness dies with them as anger builds up.

3

premeditatedsleepove t1_j0linvx wrote

But then Wall-E will save us so I’m not too worried about it.

15

Psychomadeye t1_j0o8jdz wrote

Nah man you don't get it. Everyone is Squidward when he gets fired but there's no spongebob to save the day. OP needs fuckin' counseling or something.

2

vorpalglorp t1_j0m80df wrote

You don't understand that given the freedom to most people will probably still do things like get educated and have productive hobbies. Even if they don't that's the whole point of life. Aristocrats have had basic income for thousands of years and they are responsible for most of our science. It's only when hands are free to learn and experiment do we achieve. Most people are locked in meaningless labor while their brains atrophy. Maybe you're an ambitionless drug addict at heart, but a lot of people aren't and it only takes a small minority of highly talented people to keep the systems running and support people like you who have no self motivation. Just because you cannot understand what to do with freedom don't assume you understand all the people forced to work when they have so much potential in them.

9

drillgorg t1_j0l5c1w wrote

Ah yes, because if my needs were met I would just turn into a human potato. Come on! Who gives a shit if AI can do everything better than me? I already live in that world, other humans can already do everything better than me. Doesn't stop me from finding cool shit to do. What about socializing? Imagine having all year to go hiking with your friends! If your friend Greg writes a song are you gonna be like " fuck off Greg, AI writes better songs than you"? No, you're gonna listen to it with him. And it may or may not be good. Exactly like today!

3

DancingPhantoms t1_j0ls3di wrote

with ease of production comes great opportunities for creativity. i don't think you understand the scope of the potential for creative experiences and productions to come with that. It won't just be mindless entertainment, but probably worthwhile incredible entertainment at very large scales with meaningful activities and relationships that form... the competitive aspects of humans don't just go away they evolve... just like when we got computers for the first time people wanted to learn how to code and become better at it, with a.i comes the opportunity to build large scale projects with ease and comes the opportunity to create incredible experiences. If travel becomes cheap and energy becomes cheap to the point anybody could do it you would have the freedom to travel and experience the world at scales never before seen. A future where you can travel and entertain yourself, while creatively prospering with incredible projects is very much a potential in the advent of a.i systems and cheap energy and transportation. some people might degenerate sure, but the majority will want to seek out some forms of stimulation to keep it worthwhile... it's much better than mindlessly droning on through life via working for someone else to "prove" your worth... it's significantly better than the current modus operandi of existence for the majority of people who'se sole purpose lies in comparing themselves to their mates in the current work culture. You haven't seen the bigger picture yet.

3

OctopusGrift t1_j0lz2hk wrote

You I guess suck and wouldn't have done anything in your life without a profit motive, but most people like doing things.

3

mentalflux t1_j0m4byq wrote

This is one of the most myopic takes I've heard in a while.

As we speak, there are scientific problems being worked on that are so difficult, so complex, and that have such a high payoff if they are figured out, that they can completely change how humans interact with the universe. Think near-light-speed travel, near-unlimited energy generation, geoengineering of planets, life extension, human enhancement (imagine if you could fly as easily as a bird), genetic engineering, cryogenics, nanobots, super-light high-strength materials, and the list goes on.

Even with the help of AI, we will still be working on problems like these for centuries to come. As we solve them, we will expand human life in many ways which we can hardly imagine today. We will explore and inhabit farther reaches of the universe, increase our biological and techno-biological capabilities, learn more about the nature of existence, create new lifeforms and conscious entities, likely meet foreign lifeforms in some corner of the universe, and reinvent concepts such as art, communication and connection (brain-to-brain conversations sound fascinating).

To think everyone's existence will be limited to sitting at home, collecting a UBI check, doing little hobby projects and masturbating is ridiculous. Sure, might that be a reality for some people for some short period of time in our vast future? It's possible. Will we all be forced to live that way? Nope. And is that the full extent of the destiny of the human race? Absolutely not.

3

FrostWight t1_j0mio9p wrote

I don’t think it’s healthy to say that the reason we do things in society is primarily so we can stand out from our peers. I think you were closer to the real reason we work when you said it’s what society needs. We should work in order to provide good things for others - to improve all of our lives somehow.

I think your despair about how the things we do will just be done better by AI is entirely due to your mistaken view of the purpose of work. If you had a healthier view of work, this whole post wouldn’t have happened

3

wakko666 t1_j0myo0u wrote

Congratulations. You've watched the first fifteen minutes of Wall-E.

3

MyTnotE t1_j0lb859 wrote

So wrong. This belies a complete ignorance of economics

2

co-oper8 t1_j0lgwlv wrote

Wrong. The direction that humanity goes is based on the mythology, beliefs and will of the collective. You or I or anyone else has no idea what that will look like during the time you describe where AI and robots do every bit of work there is. So what you have described is the future you would create if everyone had your mentality. We'll be sure not to let you in the programmer's seat. Human groups used to want to hunt and gather and make mud huts and tipi's so thats what they got. Then some groups wanted to make bricks and concrete and build bigger things and tell stories and invent cuisine so thats what they got. Then some groups wanted to do agriculture and build pyramids and do astronomy so thats what they got. Then some groups wanted to make steel and make railroads and make cars. During 100% of this time and even into the present day there are groups of people still hunting and gathering, and still doing just about every other step listed. Our interests are myriad and they always will be. The difference between hunting and gathering and making computer chips is so vast that the hunter had no way of predicting the computer chip and the internet. By the same token none of us has the ability to guess what the next 200 years will bring.

The only thing we could guess is that humans will continue to do a wide variety of things just like we always have. And we could guess that our behaviors will be driven by our beliefs and the mythologies that we share a la Joseph Campbell.

There is a subset of people that watched Terminator, and bladerunner and read William Gibson, and they're certain that there's this dark dystopian future. IMO that is weak minded to just go along with someone else's shitty/brilliant imagination as if it's fact. But the more that dark mentality is shared, the more people will read it, the more people are influenced by it and it becomes a mythology which CAN steer reality. Yesterday's fantasy often becomes today's reality but only if people are too soft to come up with their own plan and work towards it.

So be careful what you promote and be careful what you throw your energy into.

2

goranarsic t1_j0ll9nx wrote

If I get UBI i am starting to plan colonization of Mars or even Europe. Enough with wasting my life on stupid job. Kerbal Space Program 2 is coming these years an it will give me enough clues where to start.

Regarding OP, yes, it could be negative effects, but look at the all possibilities.

2

beedlejooce t1_j0lxwm8 wrote

Lmao. This is basically a “people don’t wanna work anymore” boomer rant covered by AI talk. I love when people talk so confidently like they’re an all knowing being. Then proceeds to be wrong about every point.

2

ltethe t1_j0m0fg5 wrote

Yes, Bill Gates weighs as much as a small cow and is a drooling mess with a VR setup strapped to his face. The billionaires of the world today absolutely prove your thesis wrong. Even Kanye has enough to never work again, but there he is, tirelessly making a fool of himself and providing the world entertainment.

2

Destructopoo t1_j0m4k4o wrote

This is so fucking stupid. Guys, there's not a point in the future when automation overtakes human productivity and replaces us. That point was some time in the 1900s. We don't need most people working to maintain society and we haven't for probably a century.

2

[deleted] t1_j0np4mp wrote

Interesting, more stats and numbers would be nice to read.

1

Actual-Ad-2748 t1_j0mff3x wrote

I disagree. The people who wouldn't do anything already aren't. It will allow people not to be exploited by shitty companies by giving them the freedom to quit and pursue actual passions or better paying jobs. Fast food/dishwashing/lawn mowing etc. will eventually be automated anyways.

​

It also would be cheaper than the food stamp/welfare/Social security and social security disability bureaucracy of owned buildings, employees and pensions etc.

​

It would save tax payers money and do more good than all of those social programs.

2

yohosse t1_j0mphq6 wrote

bruh this sub is in complete shambles. i might have been following it for a while but didnt notice until that other AI thread from yesterday. and now theres the "humanity is doomed" thread and now this.

does AI have everyone this frantic? dafuck is really going on

2

VariableVeritas t1_j0n0ipy wrote

This is just not logical. Any future that weee actually aiming for is a future without basic needs. Everyone having a roof over their head, food, and health. Universally these basic needs will be provided to you either de facto or as income in the UBI scenario.

This is a slow moving argument towards inflicting pain and struggle on all human society because you think we’re going to somehow miss the yoke. Or because we’re all so vain and dying for validation that the only reason we have hobbies is because we crave others approval. Or because there are those who are better at our talents then us (always true already) we’ll stop doing them.

I don’t need to work a load of my very short human life away earning currency so I don’t die on the streets.

2

Video320 t1_j0najlx wrote

Wow, bleak and stupid. How do you live with yourself?

2

Kalimu1590 t1_j0nlyvl wrote

People that think AI is gonna erase all jobs don't know what AI is. You're an idiot.

No one's gonna let an AI lead a business, or make important decisions. It's used for menial tasks. Factories, transport, services, etc.

Work isn't going away. It just won't be mandatory for survival.

2

HereForTheFood4 t1_j0np498 wrote

Can we start banning fhese half baked anti UBI posts please?

These people have to connection to reality.

2

danmilligan t1_j0l6fiq wrote

What you're on to is that yes, if we let the "free market" decide the future, it won't go well, with or without UBI. But if we take control back from the corporations we can engineer a UBI and generally speaking an economy that can work for actual people.

1

CardboardSoyuz t1_j0l8rcm wrote

“The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design. To the naive mind that can conceive of order only as the product of deliberate arrangement, it may seem absurd that in complex conditions order, and adaptation to the unknown, can be achieved more effectively by decentralizing decisions and that a division of authority will actually extend the possibility of overall order. Yet that decentralization actually leads to more information being taken into account.” - Hayek

1

danmilligan t1_j0ldv0s wrote

Lol Hayek. Yeah leaving things to the market has worked so well for regular people. Order is not enough. We have an order now where the rich get all the benefits of the planet's resources, which are being quickly exhausted. Why should we accept that order? The only alternative we have is to MAKE a better order, like, on purpose.

3

CardboardSoyuz t1_j0m82i7 wrote

Hayek's point, of course, is that you cannot make a better order. No group can. And the attempt to do so leads, inexorably, to deprivation and tyranny.

The unalterable fact is that nothing has gotten more people out of extreme poverty than capitalism. In fact, before capitalism and the industrial revolution, everything in human history was pretty much shit. Is there all kinds of crony shit that goes down? Of course. And there's much to be done to stop it.

Now I take a decidedly broad view of what the "free market" is -- so don't at me with "But the Labor Unions!" -- I happen to believe organizing is as fundamental a right as the right to enter into a contract (both my grandfathers were proud union tradesmen, printing and steel) and needs to be protected just like contracts need to be enforced. I happily include labor movements as part of how the market can and ought to organize itself. I am not opposed to some forms of regulation, or even progressive taxation (to a point) but the default should always be to have a light hand on the till and let the market do its thing.

You do not know what will make the world better. Nor do I. Nor does that fellow over there. But more than anything even if it could work I am unalterably opposed to it because if a committee is making decisions, my livelihood would then demand upon my power within the state (and my ability to sit through committee meetings) instead of my own labor.

So thank you but no.

3

Meep3r t1_j0mxl72 wrote

Well the point of ai is that it can replace labor. What kind of contract can truck drivers enter into with companies if they have self driving cars?

Additionally, I fail to see how the inability to create a better order in the past necessarily means that we can’t create a better order in the future? Capitalism is better than any system in the past. That doesn’t mean we can’t try to change it though. It doesn’t matter that it lifted millions from poverty. We should always look for a better way.

1

nbgrout t1_j0nmats wrote

If you want to take a really serious look at how free market economics has dramatically improved the lives of everyone since it's inception and adoption, I think you'll find you couldn't be more wrong.

Everyone, including regular people, are way better off than before free market economics, but rich people became outlandishly rich; you aren't mad at free market economics, you're mad at our ridiculous wealth inequality, they aren't the same thing.

1

skullder001 t1_j0lm0dx wrote

Our ancestors made revolutions to seize the means of production before. We could do the same now, expropiate every machine and AI server and socialize them for the good of all humanity

1

Cubey42 t1_j0lo84m wrote

You know we also use ai to stimulate economic models, the idea that ubi could be good isn't just for us, but them to. If it proves they can have more money while also making us happy, then they will bite.

1

Pig_Dreams t1_j0loi0n wrote

Sounds like Cattle Decapitation has been right this whole time. \m/

1

rdracr t1_j0lozsj wrote

Wait, isn't that a good thing? Do you really think humans are the best thing for the future? Wouldn't it be great if we could create something better than us? I mean, for as long as there's been life on this planet the only way to make a better version of ourselves was to scrump and hope for the best.

But now, we're building it intentionally, and teaching it to build itself. Sure, we'll all die...maybe horribly, but that was always the plan. Now, we're finally building children that may see explore the universe.

We're just a stepping stone in evolution, don't be surprised if we get stepped on. :)

1

bravenew66 t1_j0lqnkp wrote

I think the only way that UBI would work is if the educational system is radically overhauled. If the point of education now is for citizens to exist and work in a industrial / technological service economy, then all learning is focused on that. In a system without this financial construct, education needs to be about self actualization and self motivation. What if at the very beginning of our schooling, we were taught how to be the best versions of ourselves and contributors to our societies based on something other than commerce. Currently we are molded into constructs that are more about commodification of everything rather than values based on human potential.

1

dannyluxNstuff t1_j0m2lt2 wrote

In the the Expanse Books many people on earth were on "basic" but they were typically people without motivation or generational poverty. If you wanted to work or go to school you had to do a 1 year trial to make sure it's what you want instead of accepting basic.

1

snoopye12 t1_j0m5eks wrote

Christ, dude. Take a break from Reddit. This is an excessively bleak outlook.

1

muceagalore t1_j0malsc wrote

Are you really trying to write a fiction book? It sounds like you do

1

SanDiegoSolarGuy t1_j0mbq9a wrote

This is why Ive bought up homesteadable land ( a lot of it) and have zero debt. Ill thrive under UBI because itll just be play money.

1

ToddBradley t1_j0mjz3v wrote

One mistake AIs will not make is to think all humans are motivated by the same things. OP hasn't quite learned that yet.

1

bfrag3k t1_j0n4o36 wrote

How many meandering platitudes is this sub going to produce this week? Take your speculative and unsourced opinions off the internet and back into casual, time-killing conversation where it belongs.

My opinion, because this is my second time making fun of someone else’s on the matter:

Human greed is infinite, it represents the only bound we can 100% rely on in this scenario. The solution is whatever powerful AI + human greed + time equals. I’d embezzle a crypto exchange to just to leverage all the customer funds that I’m right.

1

hawkwing12345 t1_j0n6z0y wrote

So what if AI does it better? You presume that the current consumer capitalist society will survive the advent of AI in its current form, and even if it does, that doesn’t mean that people won’t wish to stretch their own capabilities, to better themselves, to achieve what can be achieved within the realm of human capability. In any case, humans, being human, will to some extent always place some emphasis on human achievement, even if AI is “better,” because humans are biased towards themselves. Your vision of the future is both misanthropic and deeply misguided, rooted in a misunderstanding of human nature and a worldview based on material success rather than self-fulfillment. It is not likely, not because the situation is not likely to be negative, but because it is likely to be negative in a way wholly unrelated to your vision. There are perfectly legitimate reasons to criticize the mass implementation of AI and the possibility of a UBI-based society, but yours is completely wrong-headed.

1

snowballthrown t1_j0n9pns wrote

I don't see everyone abandoning health and fitness

1

MpVpRb t1_j0narw9 wrote

Unbelievably pessimistic

I am optimistic that we will use the tools to create the StarTrek future

1

r_hove t1_j0ndjre wrote

You’re forgetting that government could decide to stop giving certain people UBI based on there beliefs. It could easily turn into a place just like China because you’re forced to comply with whatever the government says, or you don’t get your money.

1

[deleted] t1_j0njq6e wrote

Hey I have the perfect solution. You and obviously people like you who dislike UBI. Obviously like it that we are economic slaves. Or you dont appreciate freedom. But I have the PERFECt solution.

We let people like you work 24/7 at the conveyorbelt section at amazon while we enjoy our freedom hows that?

This solves all of your problems you can have your 9 to 5 slavery and we can spend our time in a way we like joining a coder community or excersize community. And you can continue working your ass to death under the whip of your superviser with emotional abuse. Problem solved assh*le

1

NathanTPS t1_j0nlv96 wrote

I think the main flaw with this argument is that it hinges on a person's desire to make money from their hobby, or seek recognition.

Let's say your hobby is golf, or dance, or back packing with family, millions of people do these activities for the pleasure of doing them. Because we are amateur hobbyists, not professionals. The root of amateur is one who does a hobby for the love of the activity, not for money.

For me, the best argument for UBI is that we as our society becomes more specialized, there will be a bigger gap between those who wish to work in those specialties, such as a doctor, lawyer, business man, yes AI CAN take over those industries, but there is a very strong human element required at the end of the day. When informed we appreciate and crave the warm bed side manner of a real medical professional, the best corporations require out of the box thinking and innovative leadership to make it I. The global economy. While much of the legal industry will be revolutionized by AI, negotiations, jury trial, and appellate reviews will demand in person representation to get the best outcome for a client. Ai may be able to learn how to mimick these qualities, but until the on the ground human feals a true connection with their overlords, it just won't happen.

No, where will AI truly help the world? Well, menial labor will soon be phased out, every step of the way ai powered robots will replace traditional workers. Corporations will amass explosive profit margins by not hiring a work force, and unemployment will skyrocket.

This is where the UBI comes in. Essentially income that would have gone towards paying g a human staff will be taxed then distributed to those who would otherwise never have become doctors, lawyers, or corporate overlords.

In this setting yes I can see a world where people enjoy their free time devoid of having to work if they don't want to, or lack the required tale to. And it's not like there won't be a market hand made goods. Even today the ultra wealthy prefer the quality of hand made items to those of mass production. Bespoke suits are a great example. Could an AI do the work a master tsilor currently does? Of course, but those with money will still go to their favorite tailor and drop $40,000 on a suit. Yes, AI could do it, but we appreciate knowing the history of items, the human skill that went into their development, even if they aren't distinguished from an AI generated product, there will always be a market for them.

With millions of people now spending unlimited periods of time hobbling and exploring the world, corporations will see an unprecedented ted spike in demand, increased demand means increased production and profits, meaning an increase in UBI from taxes.

Those who wish to work as a specialist can do so out of a sense of calling, and not simply as a means to living. Higher education can be free si ce it will predominantly be ran by AI at the lower levels and at the highest levels the scene won't be flooded with students like we have currently. Most law students now will never see a legal job did you k ow that? Yes the average debt incurred for the more than 60,00 newly minted lawyers each year is about $150,000. To me this means that most people shouldn't go to law school. In fact only about 10% of all first year lawyers work in jobs that are justified in pay fir their JD, many work in government jobs that pay less than $60k, these jobs mostly can be done away with by AI

I'm sure the same is true for the MD track and the MBA track. With less students feeling like they have to go into post graduate work to make something of themselves, they can instead follow their own passions and just enjoy life, wothout the crippling debt.

You fear an AI revolution that will turn a paridise into a hellscape, trap instead of free. This vision of yours was low hanging fruit. Invoking visions of sky net or the matrix? How cliche can you get? I'm sorry but creating a counter argument to utopia as edgy damnation has been tried and failed since biblical times, at least revelations and Daniel were more creative and original in their prophesies.

Swing and a miss

1

s0meb0dyElsesProblem t1_j0nt1ej wrote

I have hobbies because I get enjoyment from them, not for recognition.

1

PhAiLMeRrY t1_j0nuinh wrote

This doomer needs to listen to more Jaque Fresco..

What an absurd and naive notion... I learn skills every day, and I share my work with NO ONE. I sell nothing and I am driven by cognitive and spiritual growth, not approval.

You are projecting and need to get your motivations in order.

Go watch Wall-e and rub one out.

1

kWarExtreme t1_j0nw9ej wrote

Long story short, it's impossible. The rich won't let it happen and the rich control everything.

1

Honest_Switch1531 t1_j0nwdy7 wrote

If you are predicting the future social structure based on the current US system you could get a nightmare scenario. However the US is a strange outlier in terms of socialist institutions. There are quite a few developed countries such a Norway that show what a good socialist/capitalist system can become.

Once production is completely automated, then modern monetary theory becomes more important. Many central banks use it now. I think that a combined socialist/capitalist system is likely. Capitalism is good at balancing the price and demand of goods and services without too much regulation. I guessing that maybe public companies will just be taxed more or be required to give a certain percentage of shares to the government, who will then just distribute the money that would have been paid to human workers. Company share holders will continue to earn about the same as now. Private companies cannot continue to operate if there is no one to buy their services

1

DoubleHookshots t1_j0o6gl1 wrote

The future seems pretty friggin great thanks for the pep talk. I don’t give a shit if people take interest in my hobbies or not I’m gonna go rub one out now.✌️

1

GimmieJohnson t1_j0o7di3 wrote

What if this is an AI writing this and not an actual human? What if it's the AI wanting to look at things pessimistically so that we may lose morale and cave in?

1

Psychomadeye t1_j0o82k9 wrote

Did you know that people go out and exercise every day and aren't recognized or paid for it? Are you aware that people take on hobbies in increasingly technical and complex areas and say nothing about it to anyone? Do you think everyone is like squidward when he loses his job? Throw some sources for all this doom porn shit or you're a clown.

1

bbs540 t1_j0obie8 wrote

UBI would bring an unfathomable amount of evil to all of our lives. It’s never worked anywhere it’s been tried and severely hurts the economy and the country as a whole

1

Smithersink t1_j0obxro wrote

UBI doesn’t make up for human faults; there will certainly be people with no motivation, who just sit around and jerk off. The thing is, there are already those people, and there always have been. UBI just makes it so they’re not starving on the streets. Kind of a depressing view of human nature, to think we can’t do anything of value unless we’re forced to in order to feed ourselves.

1

Elmore420 t1_j0olhim wrote

Universal basic income comes with the Hydrogen Economy, it isn’t possible in a debt based economy that exploits war and slavery to exist.

1

Zendog500 t1_j0omcoq wrote

Read " Utopiia for Realist" some interesting studies in there.

1

indysingleguy t1_j0omh8l wrote

Having a clue about UBI would help the OP. It was never supposed to be a replacement for work or salary.

1

QuestionsOfTheFate t1_j0omp72 wrote

>You think you are going to have a hobby and get to do your own things in this scenario? Really? Nobody would care! You can learn to paint, sing or write music. But it’s not going to be recognized or even seen in the world where every second AI generates million more pieces.

The AI in the VR worlds might care, supposing we ever get intelligent AI.

>How are you going to motivate them to learn, even to write and read?

At some point, there will probably be enhancements to help with learning.

The VR worlds themselves could be where they end up learning anyway.

>“Hey son, if you won’t study you’ll be on the streets!”

If they have UBI, they likely won't end up on the streets, but in small apartments.

>And there we all will be, cows that eat, shit and sleep and consume entertainment non stop.

Not too much different from now, aside from many people not having to work.

Is suffering through work all that makes humans different from cattle?

Also, who'd care what they seem like at that point?

The AI (assuming AI can even think at that point and that they'd care)?

>unmotivated to even move their fat bodies

Probably going to have remedies for that, sooner or later.

Might end up becoming more like those pods in The Matrix.

>these “big corporations” are going to stop producing and supplying everyone. Because why would they continue? What would be the point? People would rise up and go protesting?

More likely that they'd end up doing the same things and just leave AI systems in charge of everything.

Only the staunch anti-VR people would spend more time in real life, but at that point, they could probably just go planet colonizing and leave the others alone.

>slowly dying out.

There'll probably be a solution for that too.

1

proletariat-platypus t1_j0osr7l wrote

It's neat how you are 100% confident in your predictions about all of human society based on a few random person opinions.

1

Chicken_Nuggetz69 t1_j0p4al2 wrote

How lonely and sad are your people’s lives that you actually think and type this stuff out ?

1

tsidedmap t1_j0qnr92 wrote

People can find satisfaction in various hobbies despite the fact that there are people who are better at those hobbies then them. People can also find satisfaction in those hobbies without the need for approval from others. Most of the amazing things people do, are not done for the purpose of seeking money, so I don’t see why you think that when a UBI happens suddenly everybody will become a porn addict with no drive to do anything at all.

You seem to have a very specific, negative idea for what the future holds, but it doesn’t feel like one based in reality.

1

tharga8616 t1_j0rse0g wrote

I see that you have no purpose in life, so I think you project your own void into the whole humanity, and I feel sorry for you. But I trust you will finally find out what makes you itch.

1

Puffin_fan t1_j0wfx3r wrote

UBI is necessary.

AI is nothing but a scam.

Here is a fairly simple example. Take a look at the most critical problems the planet faces. Global warming. Damage to the oceans. The growth of monopolies via the state.

Now, will AI help with any of those ? No, and the fact is, as operating systems and IT monopolies increase in size, those problems worsen.

1

kennyfern t1_j0x9q2y wrote

This is my life now and its pretty good, roll on UBI!

1

vyxxay t1_j0mmr2i wrote

This is Reddit, you can’t be realistic in this way

0

Skinnigem t1_j0mpgft wrote

Believe it or not, some people do things because they are fun or therapeutic, not to impress others. Also, children’s motivation to learn is not dependent on what colleges they can go to or jobs they can get. Children are naturally curious about the world. I don’t believe in UBI, but we wouldn’t stop being humans if we had it. Humans have motivations outside of pride and profit.

0

snocown t1_j0orry2 wrote

It's funny you see all the people expecting a good outcome while all I see are the people expecting a bad outcome. I'm not even throwing my eggs into your guy's baskets because your baskets are literal houses of cards at their best.

You guys feared the worst last time this happened in 2012, I don't know why you guys are acting like all this ai stuff is new. Your arguments have all fallen flat once and they will fall flat once more when people realize that the ai is t as advanced as we thought it was. You guys can't even comprehend how ai is a form of consciousness yet, it won't become a threat any time soon. Unless you consent to it of course.

I don't even know why people are coming out of the woodwork praising or fearing this shit again all of a sudden. All because of a couple memes getting out of hand?

0

Querch t1_j0kys7u wrote

Something you forgot to mention is how AI could make one or more tailored companions for people. Why even have friends who are real people when AI companions can be "much better"?

On the other hand, I think deep down, people will understand that it's a sad and lonely way to live. Some people will believe that lie that they're living a life that's real but others just can't. There will be people who'll reject the whole arrangement; some will reject it harder than others. The only question is how many and where will they go.

The thing is that vapid hedonism gets tiring. That threshold is lower for some than in others. Admittedly, there will be some who stay trapped. But those who refuse that will go out and seek something real and meaningful, wherever that might take them. One example I can think of is for one such person to get in touch with like-minded individuals and plan for starting a subsistence farming commune of sorts, where they will make what they need themselves. Case in point: there are the Amish in the USA. They never went away.

That said, I'm sure if the environment changes into what OP describes, I think we'll see quite a few Luddite communities spring up in response. Though that is a big if i deed. I really don't know how this AI thing will play out.

−1

Ph0enixRuss3ll t1_j0l3shp wrote

UBI will never happen for the same reason most people don't give money to beggars outside liquor stores. Why fund a self destructive person's destructive addiction?

That said, the most basic food and most basic shelter should be a right, not a privilege. Free public housing that checks in on people and gives them free opportunity for therapy and education is the compassionate future I want to see.

When everyone's basic needs are met is when people will have altruistic motivation rather than just surval mode trauma response to terrorism.

−1

Ashura77 t1_j0kxbt3 wrote

I see the problem here in Luxembourg with "Revis", what is paid to those not working. It's nearly 1900euros, so many uneducated people just never go (back) to work and live off of other people's taxes, have Netflix, gaming consoles, go on holidays but never actually do something to earn that. On the contrary, they dare whining that it isn't enough.

UBI and such things only work with decent people who understand they'll have to do something anyway, not with freeloaders and the like.

−6

FeatheryBallOfFluff t1_j0kzzjl wrote

Or stop paying in money and pay in food and shelter. If they want to travel they can work. Doesn't have to be money.

2

Ashura77 t1_j0l6l7m wrote

Utopia does note exist, how would that work? I move to, let's say Australia and tell them to give me a home and food? With this kind of delusion, no one will be working anymore, sure as hell I won't, I already pay enough freeloaders with my taxes, and I have to get up in the morning and they just sleep in. Nah nah, money vs services. At least let's send them all cleaning the streets and the woods, but money or housing/food for nothing?

I sometimes have the impression those advocating for all this stuff are just lazy and don't want to exhaust themselves making a living, they want others to just provide without anything in return.

1

FeatheryBallOfFluff t1_j0la1fw wrote

If you can't think of any scenario how that could work, I don't think there's any point in discussing this further with you.

But for the sake of the debate: if you want to move to Australia you have to be highly skilled and have a job lined up. Only then you move to Australia. If you at any point lose your job and your house, you could obtain a simple shelter (the bare minimum) to live and basic food (like an egg and some veggies and maybe supplements). Want beer? Work. Want to travel? Work. Want a bigger house? Work. Want drugs? Work. Want a car? Work.

By giving food, they can't use tax money to buy beer and be degenerates. They can't travel. They can survive though. That's good for worker conditions. Low wage slaves may not accept low wages, and hence their income rises, or they are automated away, until a job emerges that does pay well. It also gets rid of the homeless people issue.

Most people would hate an existance like that though, and would work to improve their situation.

I think those advocating against this stuff are ironically the ones barely paying taxes themselves (low wage slaves themselves that usually worry about those on benefits and immigrants while barely contributing to the state as it is).

1