Can humanity find purpose in a world where AI is more capable than humans?

Submitted by IamDonya t3_10ip96d in singularity

Seeing the performance of Chat GPT I think we are less than 10 years away from AI surpassing humans in basically anything.
I make three points below to lead into the question in the hope of making the question clear. Would love to hear your thoughts.

Point 1, meaning of life: Whether you are an atheist or religious person, I believe you are striving for happiness. Happiness may be a complex concept but I’d break it down into 1.a) Pleasure and 1.b) Fulfillment of purpose. ‘Fulfillment of purpose’ can be summarized as ‘make the world a better place’.

Point 2, the failure in a life spent solely in pursuit of pleasure: A life solely in pursuit of pleasure would feel empty. Sure, it sounds exciting to travel, eat great food, perhaps do some drugs, drink expensive wine, fulfill sexual desires, fly planes, etc. But after X months I would get restless. My happiness would no longer be that high, pleasure is still maxed out, but ‘fulfillment of purpose’ is completely missing.

Point 3, achieving ‘fulfillment of purpose’ in today’s world: This could be done in a myriad of ways, through epic inventions that benefit all of humanity, through drawing a painting or writing a book that bring joy to the reader. In the end I want to believe, and others to agree, that I gave more than I took. That my existence was a net positive in making the world a better place.

Question: Can humans still find ‘fulfillment of purpose’ in a world where AI far exceeds human capabilities? If AI makes better inventions, drives better, designs better, codes better, product manages better, if AI writes better books, draws more interesting art, composes better music - then what is left for humans? Will we simply have to accept that ‘fulfillment of purpose’ is gone and focus on the pleasure-part of happiness, however empty that feels? Or what can our new ‘fulfillment of purpose’ be?

​

* Reddit-user: You’re not the best in the world at anything today, so why is it upsetting that an AI is better - you went from loser to loser, nothing changed.
My answer: Even if I’m not the best in the world at my job today, I do have a job that benefits the company I’m working for. The company makes products that people enjoy. So I’m a (small) cog in a machine that benefits humanity, and thus I help make the world a better place. Tomorrow, when AI has taken over my job, I’m not that little cog anymore. I'm no longer sure there's anything I can do to help make the world a better place. That’s what changed.

* Reddit-user: Humans will use AI to evolve our capabilities and keep up with AI.
My answer: I agree that we will use technology to enhance ourselves, but I don’t see that we can keep up with AI. If you’re saying that we’ll turn our minds into software and upload ourselves to a server I think we’ve gone past the point of calling ourselves humans and the answer to my question has instead become that humanity is rendered useless and will be replaced by another form of life. To me that sounds seriously depressing, but would be interesting to hear if you think otherwise.

69

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Specialist_Sea_244 t1_j5fw225 wrote

There is no meaning to life other than what you have invented for it. If you can invent meaning for yourself in non-AI today, you will invent meaning in post-AI tomorrow.

If you don't need meaning today; then you won't tomorrow.

84

IamDonya OP t1_j5gikj2 wrote

I like the optimism that we will find new meaning, and hope you are right.

It sounds like you believe we all invent our own meaning which could be almost anything. I disagree with that and think evolution has pretty much hardcoded us to want to "make a positive difference" and that it will be very disorienting for the majority of people if AIs do everything better so there is no positive difference left to make.

4

FridgeParade t1_j5gju9v wrote

Well, the ultra rich trust fund kids who basically dont have to think about money or achieving anything seem to be doing fine, so Im not worried about a life without work.

30

usaaf t1_j5h12tc wrote

This, right here. Work and 'productive' employment are not the natural condition of humans. People who worry about 'purpose' should be super careful that that isn't their Capitalist brainwashing talking, because in this day and age, with the veritable flooding of Capitalist propaganda through every avenue, including the obvious (advertising, cultural productions) to the least suspicious (seemingly simple interactions with family/friends), there's a high chance anyone who thinks they need work has been thoroughly tricked into loving the fact they're a cog for the profit of a few.

People who say "I would feel bored without work" are great for the Capitalist. They have been conditioned by the system to love work, and that's not good. The ethical question about programming a robot to enjoy being a slave has already been answered by the Capitalists and their answer is "We'll do anything for more money." People today have already been 'programmed' to love their work, and it ain't a pretty thing. It's the root cause of 99% of these posts about how AI is going to make us so bored we kill ourselves or whatever. Yeah, if you've been told by your culture/society that you must work to feel good, then the end of that requirement could feel a little frightening and horrible.

Or it could feel like withdrawal from an extremely nasty drug, and once you get over it you might find you like life without Capitalist-purpose looming over you to be pretty damn good.

18

iiioiia t1_j5lzw1y wrote

> People who worry about 'purpose' should be super careful that that isn't their Capitalist brainwashing talking, because in this day and age, with the veritable flooding of Capitalist propaganda through every avenue, including the obvious (advertising, cultural productions) to the least suspicious (seemingly simple interactions with family/friends), there's a high chance anyone who thinks they need work has been thoroughly tricked into loving the fact they're a cog for the profit of a few.

What do you consider "Capitalist" propaganda?

As far as I'm concerned, the much more dangerous form of propaganda out there that's flying below most everyone's radar is "democracy" propaganda.

Economic systems are subordinate to the governmental system, provided actors within the economic system haven't taken over the governmental system (a bit too late for that methinks).

Install an actual democracy and these "capitalism" issues will be solved rather quickly, perhaps even voluntarily - "Would you like to share a bit more, or would you like to be nationalized / 'fucked with constantly'?" can be rather persuasive.

Also noteworthy: governmental systems are subordinate to Mother Nature.

1

BigZaddyZ3 t1_j5h1n2g wrote

Why do people like Elon Musk still opt to work then?

3

FridgeParade t1_j5h27xu wrote

Greed disease / narcissistic tendencies that need constant validation / hunger for power.

Just because some do, doesn’t mean we have to to be happy. A lot of rich people dont work at all and live perfectly happy lives. Besides, some of them “work”, in my opinion it becomes a glorified hobby when you absolutely dont need to do it.

8

BigZaddyZ3 t1_j5h2vsh wrote

Aren’t those just assumptions on your part tho? How do you know it isn’t simply because a life of endless hedonism probably becomes a bit boring after a little while?

4

FridgeParade t1_j5isoeg wrote

I grew up in a very rich area and was exposed to these families quite a bit.

Besides, people who are retired dont seem to have issues either?

1

Miserable_Mine_8601 t1_j5h2zun wrote

Why do people opt to run off to the forest and never come back

6

BigZaddyZ3 t1_j5h3pzy wrote

Why do multi-millionaires who could stop working after their first big contract, usually wait until they’re old to retire? They don’t need the money, yet you rarely hear about rich 20 year olds retiring and choosing to live the exact life some here claim they would enjoy. Why?

6

Dr__glass t1_j5h61iv wrote

You don't hear about them because they retire to a private life. It's survivorship bias, you don't hear about the millionaires that don't keep working in the public eye so it seems like it doesn't happen

6

BigZaddyZ3 t1_j5hpo68 wrote

Why don’t we see the ones who are rich and famous right now doing it? How often do you really see a person get rich in their youth and then immediately retire? Be realistic.

0

94746382926 t1_j5u4a6u wrote

There's entire communities of people who strive for super early retirement. Check out /r/leanfire or /r/fire for countless examples of people retiring in their 30's and 40's.

1

Spire_Citron t1_j5hhjeb wrote

Why would you hear about the people who retire young with just a few million?

2

BigZaddyZ3 t1_j5hpc8c wrote

I meant like athletes for example. How come Steph Curry doesn’t retire after his first 200 million dollar deal is completed for instance?

1

randomwordglorious t1_j5hx3gr wrote

He loves to play basketball. If the NBA went out of business tomorrow and the most competitive basketball league in the world was only paying $50 per game, he'd play for $50 per game.

1

BigZaddyZ3 t1_j5hxgwa wrote

Then why not just retire and play basketball all day at one of his luxurious houses? It’d be even better for him it it was really just about loving the game right?

1

Spire_Citron t1_j5i01ql wrote

I mean, nobody's saying that people who are motivated by competition or making a name for themselves don't exist. They certainly do. Becoming a pro athlete is something that takes a lot of work and dedication and which very few people get famous from doing, so it makes sense that the people who find success in it actually love doing it and don't want to drop it the second they have enough money to live comfortably. They're not a good representation of an average person.

1

randomwordglorious t1_j5j6iad wrote

If he could get the best players in the world to play against him at his house, he would. But the highest level of competition is in the NBA, so that's where he plays.

1

not_into_that t1_j5jwa5h wrote

Because there is something fundamentally broken in him.

0

BigZaddyZ3 t1_j5jxfar wrote

Ehh… that’s a little ableist don’t you think 😂

But on a serious note, I disagree. There’s a reason many people like playing games on the harder difficulties. (And sometimes they want even harder difficulties than those). It’s because when things are too easy, they become boring. They’re nothing fulfilling or gratifying about a life of total hedonism. And while certainly nobody wants a life that’s too difficult. It remains to be seen whether or not humans will truly enjoy a life with absolutely no responsibility or stakes like many here assume we will. I think that’s what OP and I were really getting at. Just my two cents

2

naxospade t1_j5r62wl wrote

Maybe this life is just a big multi-user simulated experience to stave off the boredom of eons.

1

ahundredplus t1_j5ip3n6 wrote

Are they? The ones I know seem to be blanketed in insecurity, depression, and drug addiction. Propping up pet projects with trust money but not much else.

1

FridgeParade t1_j5isj66 wrote

Haha yeah thats a common trope, but there are millions of these people and not all are drug addicts.

But we will definitely need to make sure we have proper systems in place to prevent such issues.

1

ahundredplus t1_j5l5g5r wrote

I'd say insecurity by doing nothing worthwhile is a far more common occurrence than "drug addiction". It's just one of the many characteristics.

1

LeIAmNeeson t1_j5hxfdi wrote

OP I really appreciate your post, and I'm sorry that most of the responses are shitty and pessimistic as fuck. Hopefully I never meet any of these hopeless Eeyore's who have apparently never been inspired to think deeper about why we are alive than just eating, shitting, sleeping, and fucking. So anyways fuck these other people and thanks again for thinking the way you do, because I think the same way.

Artificial intelligence poses the greatest existential dilemma that Humanity has ever faced. Every other obstacle in our past has paled in comparison. In fact, it goes against one of the very most central values in the American culture, the "American Dream". The belief that every human is deserving of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And that through hard work, every person should be able to have a good life.

Assuming that AGI is indeed going to happen, it will render large swaths of society useless in the workforce. Humans are meant to work, and to think, and to create, and to build. That is how we evolved and I honestly believe in some ways that it was our destiny to bring about the singularity. In fact I think that from some perspectives, human society is a major part of the singularity. We are the ones that are causing the exponential technological progress - artificial intelligence will only continue the progression forward.

But anyways, once we are all rendered "useless" in comparison to the godlike capabilities of AI, we are going to have to take a good hard look at ourselves. Most people throughout history have been inspired because they want to be the best, they want to leave a mark on the world, they want to be a leader in their village, they want to be remembered. That is what motivates us and when we were kids it is what we dreamed about, told stories about, and sung songs about.

Personally, I think that each of us should do our absolute best to put as much good out into the world as we can. Once the singularity comes, all of these other commenters are going to be sadly disappointed. Because a singularity is not something that we live beyond. So our purpose is to do whatever we feel is right in our life to positively influence the world around us. Although most of us won't have any hand in actually creating the AGI, we can do our best to "keep the lights on" so that other people can do the work the humanity was destined to accomplish. Sanitary workers can keep the streets clean, electricians can keep the lights on, politicians can do their best to keep improving our societies, and teachers can keep doing their best to train the next (and probably last) generation of humans.

This might sounds fairly depressing, but think of this: What are the odds that you are alive to be reading this sentence right now? Out of all of the 28 decillion + organisms alive on Earth right now, you get to experience life as the most intelligent species there is. Out of all of the 3.7 billion years of life on earth and 200,000 years of human existence, you just happen to live right now at the pinnacle of humanity, right when we are approaching the singularity. Out of all of the people who have ever lived, I will bet that in comparison, most of you live very privileged lives as we experience this incredible time period, when we have the full wealth of human knowledge at our fingertips with your smartphone. The odds of all of these questions are near-infinitesimally small.

And knowing all of this, I just don't understand how these other commenters can be so damn petty and small-minded and act like we are basically just dust in the wind. We are not dust. We are the greatest creatures who have ever walked the earth and we are destined to bring about the singularity. And those of us who continue to dream big are the ones who truly embody what it means to be a human. To you other commenters: have some respect for the fucking privilege you've been given to experience this life as a human, and maybe, just maybe, try not to be such assholes.

6

RabidHexley t1_j5oeiqg wrote

I'm sorry. I get what you're saying, and it may apply to some people, but I really don't think it does to many. And I don't see why saying otherwise makes someone an asshole. This also is an unnecessarily depressing post.

A key point here is what is "useless" or "worthless", in terms of a human. In the current world we already have to accept that for 99.99% of us what we do could easily be accomplished by one of the other millions and billions of people on this planet. How different is an AI in this regard?

Everything that I personally get joy from in life, I have literally zero care if an AI is able to do it better, I'm still getting something out of it. And I'm not talking about hedonistic pleasures, I'm talking about genuine pursuits and passions. The only thing I care about is having the freedom to pursue those passions, not a need to express my unique ability as a human to perform a task.

AI doing what I can do better doesn't take away my desire to explore, to experience life, to enjoy the world and the people around me, to enjoy creating for its own sake (and not in an attempt to be the "best" at it).

We already have planes and cars, we already have computers that can realistically simulate virtuosic instrumental playing with programming, we have weapons that have invalidated human strength, massive machines that cultivate our food.

The domain of human superiority has already shrunk by magnitudes, but people still keep being humans.

2

LeIAmNeeson t1_j5oi4v2 wrote

Actually I agree with you, that maybe this post doesn't apply for everyone, or even most people. It seems like there is a difference in psychology, maybe philosophy. And I appreciate the honest critique.

But it is honestly saddening to think that many people think that way. In my opinion, kids should be raised to believe that they can achieve anything if they work hard enough at it. Even if you aren't the smartest or the most athletic, people can still accomplish incredible things.

Yes, there will probably always be someone else out there is better at most things. But that's not what it's about. Life is about living your life to the fullest and trying to accomplish something truly great in each moment. Even something as simple as helping someone out, after you've had an exhausting day at work. You can accomplish something remarkable in that moment by pushing through with a smile on your face.

As for technology already overtaking us, that is simply not true. Technology has always been something that extended the reach of humans, not overstepped us. Cars allow us to travel faster, electricity allows us greater power, computers increase our intelligence. But those things always amplified human action and thought. Now with artificial intelligence, we face a technology that will indeed replace us.

And last point. Once the singularity comes, you will not be able to continue doing what makes you happy. That is not how the Universe or evolution works. Once there is a dominant species in a system, whether it takes 5, or 10, or 50 years, eventually the superior being won't just keep us humans alive out of love or pity or something. No - it will do what life does best and fully embrace the life it has been given to explore and create and accomplish whatever it's nature desires.

P.S. the reason I called other people assholes is because they are claiming that life has no purpose. That's just something that I disagree with wholeheartedly. It's a lot easier to be skeptical in life than to be someone with hope and optimism. It takes effort to imagine that we are here for a reason, and that humans are not just a speck in the mud.

2

RabidHexley t1_j5onv6d wrote

My interpretation of "life has no purpose" is that we make our own purpose. There is no prescribed purpose native to the universe in an of itself, we make it. As the world changes around us we change the things we find purpose in, a lot of that being a means of adapting to the lives we live (whether we chose to live that life or not).

My point about technology overtaking us is that humans still partake in activities that could objectively be performed better or far more easily through the assistance of machines. We willingly forgo machine assistance in pursuit of a lived experience.

Just look at /r/mightyharvest. These folks aren't providing for anyone from the fruits of their labor, and practically speaking a small home garden for produce is inefficient to the highest degree, but joy is still found from the mere pursuit. Should they instead use that time to try and become doctors, scientists, athletes or paradigm shifting artists of renown? Would that be a truer pursuit of purpose?

This kind of stuff wouldn't go anywhere.

AI won't replace our experience of life, nothing can. What it can do is hopefully create a future in which more people can choose what they want their purpose to be based on the life they want to live.

Edit: The problem with AI art for instance isn't that it replaces artists. It's that it makes it economically less feasible to be an artist, because it's harder to use your art to provide for yourself. It's not because it makes replaces the human desire to create art.

2

LeIAmNeeson t1_j5or9dn wrote

Very well spoken. I'm having a hard time putting my finger on exactly what the differences are between each of our arguments, but I think we share more in common than it might seem.

In response to r/mightharvest, it seems like we both see that there is a sort of simple and poetic beauty in the undertaking of an activity like that. Where there is no possibility for eventual payoff, just the pleasure of being in tune with nature.

I was atheist for basically my whole life (29 years), and it always seemed like the Universe was a cold, lifeless, desolate place, and that life on Earth was just an anomaly. That is what science and logic seems to show. But that viewpoint has changed for me over the last few years. It might sound phoney, but my thinking has genuinely shifted to a place where atheism no longer makes sense to me. Going back to my first comment, the odds just seem so incredibly small that we just happen to be lucky enough to be alive as humans right now and that it's all just a near-infinitesimally small coincidence.

It feels like we truly do matter and we have purpose beyond simply what we happen to imagine up for ourselves (even though I agree that is an innate feature of humans). It feels bigger than coincidence that we happen to be alive at exactly the moment of the singularity and the climate crisis. When everything seems to be converging together all at once.

Anyways, sorry to ramble, but at this point the difference between our arguments is simply opinion. There aren't any flaws in logic, just a difference in worldview.

2

[deleted] t1_j5j7elg wrote

Your comment has reignited my hope for the future. Thank you, stranger, for being a ray of sunshine in this gloomy thread.

1

RabidHexley t1_j5m1nq0 wrote

> there is no positive difference left to make.

I think this is the core of where your problem lies, in holding the belief that the key to a meaningful, fulfilling existence is by contributing to works. And by making a "difference".

We make our own meaning, most of us find meaning in our lives while doing tasks that millions of other people could do just as well, or by finding personal fulfillment in hobbies or passions that don't provide a practical benefit to anyone other than a personal sense of joy and self-expression.

There isn't any amount of skill an AI could hold that could take that away from us. Would AI farmers take away the joy of cultivating my own garden? Or of in painting the perfect image of a sunset just as it feels in my own mind? Do I feel less fulfilled having climbed a mountain when a helicopter could get there in a fraction of the time? Could an AI prevent me from finding fulfillment in time spent with friends and family? Did potters give up their passion when manufacturing started producing high quality pots and bowls by the millions? Did piano players stop learning when you could program realistic sounds in MIDI? We could go on of course...

Our ability to find fulfillment in our lives isn't tied to any intrinsic need to complete practical tasks that only we can do. It comes entirely from within and each other and is something that is discovered by living in a way that fulfills our sense of self.

Trust me when I say that that isn't going anywhere.

In a world where AI replaced almost all practical tasks, there would certainly be individuals who feel crestfallen when the career or passion they pursued is no longer needed in the practical sense. But that drive was developed by living in a world where people were still needed to do those things, not because it was the only path to a fulfilling existence.

1

Specialist_Sea_244 t1_j5htb1a wrote

For the sake of argument, I will agree with the premise that we have a drive to make a difference.

However, my point still stands. Every individual will make the determination of what a "positive difference" means. It could be picking up trash in a local forest. It could be raising your kids well. It could be teaching everyone that the true meaning of the [name of religious text] is that we should kill the [insert enemy]."

I think the hard wiring is to preserve your genetics. The next most common drive is to preserve memetics.

There is still no objective measure of "genetic preservation". You can have children. You can protect your brothers children in an act of altruism [save them from a fire that kills you]. You can try to preserve "your race." People think of all kinds of wacky things...

0

phaedrux_pharo t1_j5g0oee wrote

I think the world would be a pretty awesome place if everyone's biggest problem was that all their basic needs were met and they were maybe kinda bored from all the pleasure and excitement of their lives.

People are suffering and dying needlessly, literally every minute. I'll take some existential angst born from hedonism over that any day.

43

EddgeLord666 t1_j5gw0gh wrote

Hear hear! It’s the epitome of privilege when people come up with sci fi stories about how shitty a world without struggle would be. I don’t think anyone who isn’t in like the global top 5% economically could come up with such an absurd concept.

13

Spire_Citron t1_j5hhrtq wrote

Yup. Plus hobbies can have plenty of challenge and sense of achievement in them.

6

alexiuss t1_j5g2tm7 wrote

>Fulfillment of purpose

ais dont stop me from making art or writing because I don't give a shit of its 10 million people reading my books or 1000. My writing is about creating worlds for myself which others can enjoy too if they so desire

With AI tools we can do something that was not possible before - upscaling the efficiency of a single person and helping people fulfill their purpose better

33

RowKiwi t1_j5g0y5c wrote

Purpose? The vast majority of people don't have purpose, they go about their lives doing a normal job, raising kids, arguing with their spouse, and getting old.

Purpose is not a problem except for the maybe 5% who ever think about such things.

27

ajahiljaasillalla t1_j5gedjz wrote

What do you know about what's going on in people's mind? I am quite sure that most people have had their own existential crisis in their lives.

3

RowKiwi t1_j5h4lyt wrote

It's something a psychologist told me one time. He said of the people he treated, very few ~5% were interested in purpose and meaning, like I was meeting with him about.

6

Baturinsky t1_j5gejtz wrote

But what do you do when even your childs and spouse do not need you?

1

RabidHexley t1_j5oerqt wrote

Live happily knowing my loved ones are safe and taken care of?

1

IamDonya OP t1_j5ggpwi wrote

Thank you for commenting. If your figure of 5% is correct then I agree that it's basically a non-issue.
I realize not everyone sits and ponders these thoughts but I really think the figure is WAY higher than 5% that wonder about their purpose and would feel lost if they see none.

1

PanzerKommander t1_j5g4wq0 wrote

Purpose? Doing whatever the fuck I feel like.

Probably expanding my gun smithing and historical reienacting hobbies by restoration or rebuilding of classic firearms and vehicles.

Making video games.

Traveling.

You name it, ill do it.

20

p3opl3 t1_j5qugia wrote

Where will you get the money to do all that when AI replaces the value you are currently able to sell? Technically that's the bigger part of the problem here..

1

PanzerKommander t1_j5qypjy wrote

Most likely, there will be some form of UBI that part can still be invested.

The wealthy at the top aren't retarded. They didn't get their fortunes by not being able to see trends. They know that raising the QoL of everyone will be Their key to preserving a hierarchy with them at the top. They don't want chaos anymore, less probably, than we do. It will also be trivial for them to do it. Besides, they still need us to be consumers.

Now, as for me? My wife an I are fortunate and disciplined, we've invested 60-80% of our income for the last 15 years in a mixture of Index funds, T-Bills, and other well-balanced assets. We are going into our late 30s with a portfolio that, should we retire now, will grant us a better salary than the average American our age (we will keep working to ensure a much better outcome later of course).

Trust me, the S&P 500 will always grow. Yes companies will fall out of it, but their shares will be sold and reinvested in ones that are rising (Charles Schwabb even has an AI directed mutual fund too).

If T-bills ever become worthless, then AGI and rich people will become the least of your worries.

And we own a lot of investment properties, including a nice ranch.

Basically, invest what you can now (the financial illiteracy in this sub astounds me. I thought thst this would be a place with more educated individuals) and standby and wait for the future. This is still a democracy and you still have power. The people at the top have a vested interest in keeping something similar in appearance to the status quo.

4

p3opl3 t1_j5qzd31 wrote

I absolutely need to start investing more.. that's true... I look after my parents financially.. so it's harder than normal..

Fingers crossed on the UBI.. I have a feeling UBS is probably more realistic myself..

Great talk just released on TED about this...

https://www.ted.com/talks/aaron_bastani_the_case_for_free_universal_basic_services/comments

2

PanzerKommander t1_j5r07dz wrote

I'll have to check that TED out. Big corporations are already expecting something like a UBI. I wouldn't be suprised if we see a mix of UBI and something like Friedman's Reverse Tax Credit to start off with.

2

SteppenAxolotl t1_j5gyrtb wrote

How do you envision doing all that if you have no income? What if the only welfare assistance on offer is a daily voucher for 3 meals and a nightly reservation in a local shelter.

−6

PanzerKommander t1_j5h12ng wrote

Well, my wife and I have been investing our entire lives and have enough to go FIRE I'm our mid 30s with a better yearly payout than the average worker our age.

That being said, do you honestly think that there won't be some sort of UBI when we hit that point? Do you seriously think we won't have a post scarcity society when we have the entire solar systems worth of natural resources and the AI and robots to get it?

I swear listening to the doom and gloom on this sub makes me wonder why a large percentage of its user base hasn't offed themselves yet.

2

SteppenAxolotl t1_j5hp001 wrote

I know those AI and robots will belong to someone. Do you think they will be any different than you. Do you have any plans to share your some of your investments with the lest fortunate. Why would you expect the companies that are investing billions to develop AI and robots will give you free stuff.

Try not to be too disappointed if reality chose not to conform itself to your wildest dreams.

1

just-a-dreamer- t1_j5fxd0c wrote

As an atheist, I see my purpose in life to follow a proven path as best as I can to make life better. Religion has no place in this.

An ASI, provided it does not kill as all, is the best approach to that end. Every problem we face in this horrible world is solved within one generation. Humanity is elevated to leave the struggle for survival behind.

I care little about depressed people who might miss "working for a living" as their true calling.

It is better to be depressed in abudance than be happy in scarcity. For scarcity can kill you, and it often does.

14

iiioiia t1_j5m0l6r wrote

> Religion has no place in this.

As a Taoist pedant, I lol'd.

0

No_Confection_1086 t1_j5g4140 wrote

I think you described "validation", which is a kind of purpose. Purpose can be anything, run a marathon, learn a new skill, beat a game. lots of things that don't involve other people

11

RowKiwi t1_j5g82o7 wrote

So true, many people confuse external validation, with purpose.

8

IamDonya OP t1_j5gn0ew wrote

Interesting perspective. Sounds somewhat like the argument alexiuss makes here in the thread as well - alexiuss doesn't care if 10 million people, or 1000, or no one reads their books. This sounds foreign to me, if I wrote a book I'd want as many as possible to read it. And certainly a great part of that wish is due to validation, that I want others to see me and think I did something good.

But even if you remove the validation, I'd still want to do something positive for the world even if only I knew I had done it. I foresee myself laying on my deathbed thinking back on my life. Did I make a positive difference? If the answer is only that I completed a difficult game, ran a marathon and learned to juggle then I will be disappointed in myself. If, on the other hand I built something that others can use, or helped someone - whether they know I did it or not - I will feel I contributed to the world and take comfort from it. So what I describe as "Fulfillment of purpose" is different from validation, even if I'll happily admit to also seeking validation.

6

sticky_symbols t1_j5ga2db wrote

Very few humans make great inventions, do much art, or write books. A lot of them still consider their lives meaningful, with or without religion.

Why? I'm pretty sure it's because they:

Accomplish goals and complete cool projects

Create meaningful relationships

Positively impact other people.

These things are all still possible when AI is better at everything.

5

jonaslaberg t1_j5gc0zv wrote

I enjoy playing my guitar, even though I’m not João Gilberto. I enjoy cooking even though I’m not a Michelin grade chef. I enjoy a run even though my personal best is 10km in 55min. Etc. Even today I enjoy doing things I’m not the world’s best at. I don’t see that changing when someone else is the new best.

4

Secret-Score6062 t1_j5g4d3f wrote

> if AI writes better books, draws more interesting art, composes better music - then what is left for humans?

maybe this will motivate us to rethink why do we create art at all, do we create just to post it somewhere and to sell our work or we create for the fun of the action of creating and learning new skills

3

ninjasaid13 t1_j5g8p6p wrote

And if it's to express our pain and pleasures. Well we can still do that. I'm not sure what pain we are going to be expressing in a post-scarcity world where everything is done by AI.

1

Azihayya t1_j5ie1ip wrote

We're heading towards a transhuman future where being a human becomes a choice. What it means to be human is to accept your limitations, your defining features. From the faculties of our brain intended for survival, for reproduction, for a host of features that can very well be replaced--to our orientation to gravity, our forward facing eyes, etc.

Everything in life comes down to survival. The question will always be, "can it survive?" And that's exactly the question that humans will be asking themselves as they attempt to forge their identities moving forward into a superintelligent future. That's the question that artificial intelligent agents will have to ask themselves as they attempt to forge meaning in life and identities for themselves--and that is the question that is going to define what it means to be a superintelligence agent.

​

For those of us that would choose to be human (that is, to be apart of what will ultimately become the 'theater of humanity'), we necessarily need to accept what we're giving up--what we're sacrificing--and we need to learn to adapt, to find a way of life, to seek meaning in what we're capable of. It's the very limitations of our mind and the way that we frame the world that creates meaning for us, that necessarily separates us from superintelligent agents with faculties far exceeding our own--we find meaning in the human experience. What it will mean to live a meaningful life as a human moving into the future is bound to change.

3

IamDonya OP t1_j5k7gd1 wrote

Very interesting points and perspective, thank you for commenting. I think this is spot on and would love to hear more if would be willing to expand on it: "It's the very limitations of our mind and the way that we frame the world that creates meaning for us, that necessarily separates us from superintelligent agents with faculties far exceeding our own--we find meaning in the human experience."

3

Azihayya t1_j5lseai wrote

I read some of the book How Emotions are Made by Lisa Feldman Barrett, which argues that emotions are made rather than inherited, and furthermore that we develop our emotions to aid us in survival. Emotions in this sense are physical reactions to physical stimuli, and in that sense sort of demystify what emotions really are.

There are so many philosophical questions left unanswered about what it means to be human. For example, why do we believe that the mountains and the sky, the sun and the lake, are beautiful? It's easier for us to understand why we might find other humans attractive--we might think that wide hips are attractive because survival pressures lead us towards that impulse, which allows women to give birth to children with large brains. Yet, even with the body there are aesthetic principles that we don't fully understand and nonetheless find attractive.

Whatever the reason may be, we can be sure that our aesthetic principles are ultimately guided by evolution. This is a fact that is unlikely to change when it comes to machine and artificial intelligence--but the defining feature there is that artificial intelligences are modular, non-biological, and both durable and enduring. In the sense that an artificial agent is modular, it's possible for several agents to combine or to split apart at will, and only elements of themselves at that--but one of the defining features of human identity is that we exist as an immutably singular creature. Although we are made of trillions of cells and other symbiotic creatures, although our brain is composed of billions of individual brain cells, they all act collaboratively to give life to the human specimen, and in the case of the brain to develop a singular identity by which the entire body can act in unison.

Understanding this, what kind of identity might an artificial agent form? I don't claim to fully know, nor could I ever understand in entirety given the limited capacity of my human brain. Having a singular identity tends to be conducive to human survival; having several different identities seeking control over one body is likely to cause distress and conflict. This does surprisingly happen in some people with dissociative identity disorder, and is only known to occur from extreme childhood trauma.

Something that we know about humans, I think, is that we have an incredibly strong desire for belonging and connection. It's as if we would be reduced to the realm of beasts if humans were to live on their own as lone hunters and foragers. Socialization has always been our greatest strength, and I think the most relevant questions regarding our humanity and what we will do with it in the future will be questions revolving around how we relate to each other.

3

Black_RL t1_j5iu4b6 wrote

Already only a couple of humans excel, all others continue with their lives.

AI is no different.

3

sticky_symbols t1_j5gc33l wrote

Look at burning man for what people do when their material needs are met.

They come up with fun things to give away and activities to share. And they do giant projects just because they're cool and people will be impressed.

2

Tencreed t1_j5ionuy wrote

Since I can't agree with your second point, I'm not sure there's much to discuss.

2

IamDonya OP t1_j5lkm7k wrote

Thanks for commenting.

If you were given the option to be hooked up IV to a drug that would give you the sensation of intense pleasure, x10 stronger than you'd ever experienced, and the effect was guaranteed to never wane. You'd be laying in bed like a vegetable, doing nothing, but experiencing this incredible pleasure. Nurses and staff would keep you alive until your body aged and died 100 years from today. Would you do it, and would you say that it was a great life?

If a life of pleasure is all you need, the above is pretty much as good a life could be, right?

Thinking through the thought experiment above is what made me conclude that I want more out of life than pleasure. But it would be interesting to hear if others see it differently, and perhaps feel that this would be a great life.

1

Tencreed t1_j5lx365 wrote

Just having the "pleasure" button artificialy pushed would feel empty. But having a great time, and sharing it with new people, in new locations, discovering new stuff, in a wrold with enough tech to imagine new experiences, travels, forms of arts, or type of sentient entities we can't even think of today could probably keep me entertained at least a few centuries.

But if we ever get to witness the singularity, our best bet is to stay mentally flexible, and ready to reassess any of our belief. Because that would be one hell of a ride to destination unknown.

3

PoliteThaiBeep t1_j5mkj69 wrote

After AGI humans are in essence obsolete. I believe we will transcend the human form either way - whether through evolution and merging with ASI or extinction.

This makes me excited and always did - it's really hard to imagine for this to be depressing.

It's like the ultimate dream - vastly smarter, stronger, significantly richer everything including emotions and whatever we desire as well as countless other things we can't possibly understand yet.

In case getting to ASI won't lead to extinction some humans will undoubtedly choose not to transcend. For people like that I can imagine it could be depressing, but otherwise I can't.

2

Baturinsky t1_j5g5n60 wrote

I think human purpose can be the "spiritual guidance" of AI. I.e. figuring out what AI goal should be long therm. Should it just devour entire universe and then wait for the heat death of the universe? Or it should have make new sentient life forms, preserve existing once, and let them flourish?

1

RowKiwi t1_j5g8akp wrote

Why would AI be interested in accepting the guidance of monkeys?

1

ninjasaid13 t1_j5g8zmp wrote

>I think human purpose can be the "spiritual guidance" of AI

I don't think humans can be anyone's spiritual guidance let alone AI's.

It is true that without humans, AI don't have any real goals with pure logic besides waiting until entropy reaches its maximum.

1

Baturinsky t1_j5geqi5 wrote

Maybe not yet. It will time and assistance of AI itself to figure it out.

1

ninjasaid13 t1_j5g87fj wrote

>1.b) Fulfillment of purpose. ‘Fulfillment of purpose’ can be summarized as ‘make the world a better place’.

I don't really think about this. If robots can take this job of making the world a better place, I'd gladly let them.

1

TinyBurbz t1_j5g8l9k wrote

Just what do you mean by more capable? Computers already kick our ass at math and a bunch of other tasks.

Do you mean in subjective tasks? Regardless of what many around here think, AI is not going to "surpass humans" in subjectively meaningful tasks. The value and beauty of art is in the eyes of the beholder. Ultimately, until our machines exhibit a will and life of their own, and the ability to sense the world about them what they create is meaningless. While AI models art can render a scene as well as anyone, it can't convey feelings. Likewise, AI that writes music sounds impressive, but truthfully it sticks to corporate music formulas, just as ChatGPT doesn't understand the topics it writes about, it just "knows" what to say next.

So, what you're really asking is "Can humanity find purpose without their 9-5 desk job" and the answer is yes. I'll go build a battlebot or buy a racecar or something.

1

IamDonya OP t1_j5gowi4 wrote

Yes, I mean more capable also in "subjective tasks" as you call it. I don't think there's anything 'magical' happening in our brains that couldn't be replicated in software and computer hardware. I wrote less than 10 years in the post and understand if people think we are farther away than that. But I really do believe we are less than 10 years away until AI outperforms humans also in the "subjective tasks".

1

TinyBurbz t1_j5grziv wrote

>But I really do believe we are less than 10 years away until AI outperforms humans also in the "subjective tasks".

By what metric?

1

IamDonya OP t1_j5hap85 wrote

By the metric of human perception and grading. Meaning that humans would grade the AI-generated music as superior to anything created by humans, same for literature, same for political ideas, same for social interaction, same for - you name it.

You seem to disagree, and have the opinion that there are tasks that humans will always outperform AIs in? Do you have any arguments for that view to be true?

1

TinyBurbz t1_j5hr2wa wrote

>By the metric of human perception and grading.

Too vague. What do you mean by this?

1

IamDonya OP t1_j5i8rzk wrote

I'm starting to suspect you're pulling my leg here. Not sure if I can describe it much clearer than the post you just replied to, but here's another try:

  • On IMDB, all of the highest ranked movies will have been made by AIs, the only human-made movies that rank high are the ones that everybody knows the director used AI-input to create anyway.
  • On Spotify, the songs with the most listens will all have been composed by AI, none of the songs made by humans garner nearly as many plays.
  • The Nobel prizes continue to be awarded to humans, but everyone knows that the winners were helped by an AI that did the heavy lifting. Also, everyone knows that there were more important developments in the field in the last year but was not recognized with a prize because it was strictly AI, there was no human involved to give the prize to.
  • A woman going on a date is at first disappointed and saddened when she realizes that the dude she is having dinner with seems to just want to get out of there and return home to his sex-bot. But on second thought she is relieved. She realizes that she'd like nothing more than to get back home to her own bot as well. Not only has her bot never failed to please her sexually, the conversation with the bot is 10x more interesting than talking to this dude and the bot knows what emotional buttons to push too.

You may not believe the above to be a possible future scenario (if so I'd love to hear your arguments). But I do believe you understand what I mean, no?

0

TinyBurbz t1_j5iht99 wrote

>On IMDB, all of the highest ranked movies will have been made by AIs, the only human-made movies that rank high are the ones that everybody knows the director used AI-input to create anyway.

Ah yes, IMDB, the place where botfarms literally offer the service of 100 reviews for $5 can be trusted.

>On Spotify, the songs with the most listens will all have been composed by AI, none of the songs made by humans garner nearly as many plays.

Lmao really? "The most popular music" is all the same song anyway. Modern music could all be written by AI and it wouldnt change anything. It doesn't mean AI "surpassed" humans, as AI isn't even needed to to do this. It can be done with a SEED:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOlDewpCfZQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuGt-ZG39cU

>The Nobel prizes continue to be awarded to humans, but everyone knows that the winners were helped by an AI that did the heavy lifting.

"AI did the heavy lifting" is like saying "the library did the heavy lifting" or "the college did the heavy lifting"

>Also, everyone knows that there were more important developments in the field in the last year but was not recognized with a prize because it was strictly AI, there was no human involved to give the prize to.

Source: Trust me.

>A woman going on a date is at first disappointed and saddened when she realizes that the dude she is having dinner with seems to just want to get out of there and return home to his sex-bot. But on second thought she is relieved. She realizes that she'd like nothing more than to get back home to her own bot as well. Not only has her bot never failed to please her sexually, the conversation with the bot is 10x more interesting than talking to this dude and the bot knows what emotional buttons to push too.

Source: /r/IncelThoughts

0

IamDonya OP t1_j5jzuq2 wrote

I'm quite sure at this point that you understand what I mean even if my examples weren't that great.

In your initial post you asserted that AIs will never surpass humans in what you called "subjectively meaningful tasks", citing their lack of i) will, ii) life and iii) ability to sense the world around them, as arguments.
I gave my argument for why I believe they may, which is that I think our brains can be perfectly modeled as computing machines.

Ultimately I hope you're right, that would make humans truly special. I replied in the hope of hearing more about your thoughts and arguments for your position.

Seeing how you fail to give any arguments to support your point and instead have resorted to ad hominem and trying to funny, it's pretty clear you don't have any.

Thanks anyway for commenting to my initial question.

0

TinyBurbz t1_j5kunwc wrote

>I'm quite sure at this point that you understand what I mean even if my examples weren't that great.

You don't even know what you mean. You gave examples, but you weren't able to describe what you mean. Unless, you really do mean "the consumer market determines that it likes AI music and movies" which as I mentioned, is an artificial representation anyway.

​

>In your initial post you asserted that AIs will never surpass humans in what you called "subjectively meaningful tasks", citing their lack of i) will, ii) life and iii) ability to sense the world around them, as arguments.I gave my argument for why I believe they may,

Well you're objectively wrong. They dont.

​

​

>which is that I think our brains can be perfectly modeled as computing machines.

Don't hold your breath, it might be decades.

​

> I replied in the hope of hearing more about your thoughts and arguments for your position.

I don't do pseudointellectualistic debates. Facts are facts. Dont like it, tough.

>Seeing how you fail to give any arguments to support your point and instead have resorted to ad hominem and trying to funny, it's pretty clear you don't have any.

See above, I am not here to argue. Just tell you to stop being pseudointellectual. Not insulting you here, you sound to me like a ego-head teenager or delusional young adult. You haven't even begun to ascend the slope of enlightenment yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

1

the-eclectic-chair t1_j5jps34 wrote

> The value and beauty of art is in the eyes of the beholder. Ultimately, until our machines exhibit a will and life of their own, and the ability to sense the world about them what they create is meaningless.

The meaning, or lack thereof, of what they create is in the eyes of the beholder, not the creator.

0

sticky_symbols t1_j5g9nrm wrote

Agreed that people are striving for happiness. They just often have really incomplete theories about how to get it.

1

Extofogeese2 t1_j5gad5p wrote

I like to believe that some form of spiritual enlightenment is possible. No evidence for that, it just beats believing in nihilism for me.

With that in mind, I think evolving AI into something that could take care of all our needs would allow humanity to become fully spiritually aligned and achieve collective enlightenment. It would give us all the tools necessary to master the physical realm and move beyond it. I personally would spend my time trying to be as healthy as possible, practicing meditation and yoga, and trying to develop the deepest level of compassion and empathy possible etc. Even if I'm (very likely) wrong, it gives me something interesting to do.

1

sticky_symbols t1_j5gcn8b wrote

Spiritual enlightenment is one route to lasting happiness. it's not mystical at all. And nihilism is not the only alternative to believing in religion or enlightenment. You can believe that life is meaningful to other people and yourself, so impacting lives is meaningful in that strong sense.

2

sticky_symbols t1_j5gbw5y wrote

I think challenging, exciting, and fun games and projects will play a big role in finding meaning in a post-scarcity world.

1

turnip_burrito t1_j5gdvss wrote

Many people already find purpose in doing things that don't require being a cog in a machine or comparison to other entities. If they rely on those things to feel fulfilled, then they will need to find something else when ASI is created.

1

Rakshear t1_j5gtmah wrote

When ai is that capable we will be getting (but not yet) ready to explore space locally in our system with rockets that can make years of current travel in just months. At that point the natural declining birth rates will mean plenty of old people who don’t want robots helping them will want human care, as well as the importance of mathematics and basic education being less about grades and more about the learning process, we will be teaching more social and emotional education to bolster the lack of care we have been giving each other in this Industrial Age. This is needed for long space travel to be humanely feasible without the crews murdering each other since I doubt we will have cyrosleep down safe enough given the cellular damage that occurs, and the pressures of colonization of mars and Venus which will remain hostile environments for 100s of years until we perfect terraforming, will cause intense emotional and mental strain. Even with Ai, humanity will need each other to remain humane, and unless we want to strip earth to the core we will have limited resources that can be used in space so we are looking at probably 150-200 years before we even begin to colonize outside our solar system without spreading to thin. Of course my assumptions rely on ever changing information so this is just imho.

1

coberi2 t1_j5gvor7 wrote

>I gave more than I took.

Human life is inherently selfish. Try to remember how many thousands of animals you fed upon to sustain your life.

as for point 3, most people do not achieve exceptional achievements. in fact for most of human history, people rarely invented or discovered new things, up until the renaissance/industrial revolution.

1

Inevitable_Snow_8240 t1_j5gx4hs wrote

This is as much a spiritual question as a practical one, and it’s one I’ve pondered separately from anything to do with this community, but from the perspective of our economic system and the type of meaning that is considered to be meaningful by our society. AI or not, we need a radical re-thinking of our purpose in the universe and what it means to be human, to live a life, and to be happy. I think we will always find the means to give life meaning and purpose and give ourselves fulfilment and that will be a perennial issue for humanity, AI or not.

1

ShowerGrapes t1_j5h0fm2 wrote

join the /r/circuitkeepers and let's build that future together

1

the-powl t1_j5hlri0 wrote

sorry, but you guys can't even spell ChatGPT 🤔

1

Comfortable_Slip4025 t1_j5hc4k9 wrote

For most of history people didn't see things as constantly improving (or ought to be improving). Fulfillment of purpose was more about doing one's part well. Whether things got better or worse was up to God, or the gods. In our hypothetical, AI would play the role of the gods.

1

Spire_Citron t1_j5hh635 wrote

Do people really find it fulfilling to be a small cog in the success of a company? I mean maybe if the company you work for is doing something cool or good for the world, but most aren't. We have to remember that companies haven't been around forever. Way way back your only job was to be part of a tribe and contribute to the basic survival of yourself and your community. Wouldn't it be a better world if we could live in a society where we get our fulfillment from helping one another out? All these things we've decided we need in order to feel fulfilled in the modern world are largely just a result of the pursuit of money being pushed on us as the most important thing our whole lives, and then most people find out that having those things doesn't actually bring them the satisfaction they were hoping for anyway.

1

ElwinLewis t1_j5hkfc2 wrote

Fulfillment has changed in so many ways

But let’s assume AI does all these things better than humans? I still think that there will for a long time be many people in poor situations that need help and assistance.

Are we already assuming that AI will be able to solve these issues? Congratulations- you are in the first generation of mankind to experience a world where people are free, where people are not hungry, and where people always have a place to live. It’s quite a hyper optimistic point of view in my opinion.

Life is so short and for most the ability to spend time with their families and not have to deal with the stress of providing modern life, is something that we should acknowledge as perhaps the greatest achievement ever as a society.

Think of hobbies, If AI can write better music than me ? So many people already can, but they aren’t writing my music. I enjoy playing the guitar and singing, and AI can’t do that for me, only I can.

AI can’t replace throwing the ball in the backyard with your son for the first time

AI can’t replace everything

1

dragon_dez_nuts t1_j5hqapl wrote

We don't have a purpose already

1

Bruh_Moment10 t1_j5oy1ip wrote

My purpose is to look at pictures of frogs and buy transformers and so far I’m doing a great job.

1

placebogod t1_j5hr01p wrote

Meaning is in the eye of the beholder

1

lendenguy t1_j5hvgu4 wrote

I dunno, make it the ai's problem. If AI is so much more capable in every sense of the word, AI can figure out how to give us something fulfilling to do lol

1

randomwordglorious t1_j5hwqkx wrote

The meaning of your life being linked to your productivity is a creation of capitalism. When AI is more powerful than humanity, capitalism collapses, and the meaning of your life is whatever you want it to be.

1

LeIAmNeeson t1_j5hyndg wrote

Reposting my comment from deep in one of the threads:

OP I really appreciate your post, and I'm sorry that most of the responses are shitty and pessimistic as fuck. Hopefully I never meet any of these hopeless Eeyore's who have apparently never been inspired to think deeper about why we are alive than just eating, shitting, sleeping, and fucking. So anyways fuck these other people and thanks again for thinking the way you do, because I think the same way.

Artificial intelligence poses the greatest existential dilemma that Humanity has ever faced. Every other obstacle in our past has paled in comparison. In fact, it goes against one of the very most central values in the American culture, the "American Dream". The belief that every human is deserving of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And that through hard work, every person should be able to have a good life.

Assuming that AGI is indeed going to happen, it will render large swaths of society useless in the workforce. Humans are meant to work, and to think, and to create, and to build. That is how we evolved and I honestly believe that it is our destiny to bring about the singularity. In fact I think that human society is a major part of the singularity. We are the ones that are causing the exponential technological progress - artificial intelligence will only continue the progression forward.

But anyways, once we are all rendered "useless" in comparison to the godlike capabilities of AI, we are going to have to take a good hard look at ourselves. Most people throughout history have been inspired because they want to be the best, they want to leave a mark on the world, they want to be a leader in their village, they want to be remembered. That is what motivates us and throughout our lives it is what we dream about, tell stories about, and sing songs about.

Personally, I think that each of us should do our absolute best to put as much good out into the world as we can. Once the singularity comes, all of these other commenters are going to be sadly disappointed. Because a singularity is not something that we live beyond. So our purpose is to do whatever we feel is right in our life to positively influence the world around us. Although most of us won't have any hand in actually creating the AGI, we can do our best to "keep the lights on" so that other people can do the work the humanity was destined to accomplish. Sanitary workers can keep the streets clean, electricians can keep the lights on, politicians can do their best to keep improving our societies, and teachers can keep doing their best to train the next (and probably last) generation of humans. We can love our families and friends, be kind to the strangers in our community around us, treat nature with respect and admiration, and just be a force for good.

This might sound fairly depressing, but think of this: What are the odds that you are alive to be reading this sentence right now? Out of all of the 28 decillion + organisms alive on Earth right now, you get to experience life as the most intelligent species there is. Out of all of the 3.7 billion years of life on Earth and 200,000 years of human existence, you just happen to live right now at the pinnacle of Humanity, right when we are approaching the singularity. Out of all of the people who have ever lived, I will bet that in comparison, most of you live very privileged lives as we experience this incredible time period, when we have the full wealth of human knowledge at our fingertips with your smartphone. The odds of all of these questions are near-infinitesimally small.

And knowing all of this, I just don't understand how these other commenters can be so damn petty and small-minded and act like we are basically just dust in the wind. We are not dust. We are the greatest creatures who have ever walked the earth and we are destined to bring about the singularity. And those of us who continue to dream big are the ones who truly embody what it means to be a human. To you other commenters: have some respect for the fucking privilege you've been given to experience this life as a human, and maybe, just maybe, try not to be such assholes.

1

IamDonya OP t1_j5k94pp wrote

Thank you for posting LeIamNeeson, your points resonate strongly with me. Love this passage towards the end, fantastic -

"We are not dust. We are the greatest creatures who have ever walked the earth and we are destined to bring about the singularity. And those of us who continue to dream big are the ones who truly embody what it means to be a human."

2

LeIAmNeeson t1_j5keafi wrote

No problem. And thanks for the kind words. I did want to say I sort of regret coming on so strongly in reaction to the other posts in this thread. But it’s just so much easier to be skeptical in life than to have hope and to try to see the bigger picture. So sometimes it feels like you have to put up a fight against the gloomy and unimaginative ideas like what many of these other people are presenting.

I really appreciated what you said in your post as well (for example: wanting to give more than you took, and to be a net positive influence in the world). It’s such a breathe of fresh air to read. And much respect to you for standing your ground and having these conversations. One of my weaknesses is that I tend avoid these conversations because it’s hard to protect my own sense of purpose.

Last thing, one of my favorite poems of all time is “Do not go gentle into that good night” by Dylan Thomas. I’m sure you’ve heard it before, but it has always been something that I’ve fallen back on

2

IamDonya OP t1_j5kjbjb wrote

Great reference and amazing poem. There's a pretty powerful scene in Interstellar where someone reads the first parts of it as they set off...

2

fr0_like t1_j5i6iaj wrote

Existentialism answers this question, the answer is yes, humanity can continue to find meaning and purpose in existence even if AI overtakes us in every measurable way from a task-accomplishment perspective. Why? Because we must make meaning from our experience. If we don’t, we don’t persist. The crushing weight of no meaning or purpose in our life activates our Thanatos, our drive to self destruct.

But beyond that, I don’t view it off the mark that the universe experiences itself through the myriad forms it has assumed since its hypothetical inception at the Big Bang. The universe can experience itself through the human perspective, through the AI. It’s an experience regardless of the frame of reference.

1

JournalistTop1482 t1_j5ia2ry wrote

My purpose will always be to submit and strive for unending obedience to Allah

1

JaKtheStampede t1_j5imyve wrote

I think we'll do what humans have always done. Adapt, thrive, and expand. I just hope by the year 40,000 things don't turn out like someone else thought up.

1

JohnnySasaki20 t1_j5iuxtn wrote

We won't be completely obsolete if we learn to modify ourselves. Maybe we get AI to re-design our DNA to be as perfect as possible, to the point we're 1000x smarter than we currently are, and we could design nanobots and/or brain-computer interfaces which allow us to access remote computing power, or even tap into eachothers brains and become a hive mind. AI could just be an extention of ourselves vs a separate entity.

1

SnooLemons7779 t1_j5j2exj wrote

If AI becomes better than humans at spirituality, abstract thinking, charisma/charm, and deception, then we truly could be at the mercy of AI.

1

SmoothPlastic9 t1_j5j3889 wrote

Do anything aside from being popular and getting people to know your work

1

Nyron45 t1_j5jezfl wrote

Family has always been my main purpose. And i don't think ai can change that. ai can't take your hobbies and loves. Just improve your experiences with them. Im sure some will struggle in the beginning but humans efforts will shift focus. Humanity's spirt for creation will just drive those who truly want it.

1

the-eclectic-chair t1_j5joy0l wrote

If AI is beyond human control, we either live a life of conflict, submission, or annihilation.

If AI is within human control, it will simply elevate the conflicts we already have. But the struggle for meaning will largely be the same. Achievement, glory, pleasure, acceptance.

If you're concerned about craft being overtaken by AI, have no fear - there are people still making things by hand which should've been eliminated by mass production.

1

not_into_that t1_j5jw6mj wrote

Working for a soulless oil company that lays people off like the plague sure fulfills my needs for self worth. Thank god some one is saying it.

1

Hodoss t1_j5jxpyx wrote

I guess we need to switch from a ‘slave’ to a ‘nobility’ mindset. AI is a better slave than you can ever be so it leaves you no choice but to be a master.

If you can’t be a small cog in the machine, become its desire engine, the will that sets it in motion.

You may take over the AI that has taken over your job, and see what new, grander goals you can achieve with it.

Computers used to be human, it was a job. Rooms full of people computing with pen and paper. Artificial computers took it over. Yet we’re not regretting that, I bet most don’t even know the fact. You’re not trying to keep up with your Artificial Personal Computer, rather it’s a symbiotic relationship, arguably it’s a mental prosthetic, an exoself, and you’re already a cyborg.

Humanity can’t be rendered useless because it never was useful in the first place. Fulfilment of purpose is pleasure, and purpose is arbitrary.

Make the world a better place? Humanity is destroying this world’s biodiversity, so arguably, destroying humanity would make the world a better place (I’m talking like a rogue AI lol, just trying to show the relativity of such purpose).

A more constructive goal would be to colonise space so as to spread life, reduce the load on our little planet, preserve life in case of a cataclysm. I think it would be awesome! But even that is arbitrary. ‘Life’ didn’t ask for it and can’t be thankful.

1

JVM_ t1_j5k8awx wrote

Thought Experiment:

Can humanity find purpose in a world where electricity is more capable than humans?

1

dannydilworth t1_j5ld2qt wrote

You should read the book Life 3.0. He discusses this topic at length about how humanity evolves alongside our new AI overlords.

1

CubeFlipper t1_j5h2p42 wrote

I don't need purpose. I need sex, drugs, and whack-a-mole.

0

MrCensoredFace t1_j5hv2xq wrote

You have just assumed that we need a purpose when that's far from the truth. We humans don't have the need to be "useful". We have the need to be "competent". And that will be through hobbies. No, the world won't become like the one you saw in wall e, instead it would be a world where everyone is busy learning skills for the sake of it. Ye sure you could argue that machines could do it better, but humans don't give a fuck. We like to compete and flex on each other. Chess for example, it has already been infiltrated by AI, but that doesn't stop chess players from playing. Hell, they are having more fun than ever now because of the weird bots they can use. What I'm saying is that humans will always want to flex one another. That sounds like a bad thing, but it's fantastic actually. Arts and sports will never die, because we will be too busy using them to compete with each other..

0