Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Desperate_Food7354 t1_j46cml2 wrote

I love how everyone’s conception of AI is that it has human feelings and isn’t just a super complex calculator that doesn’t require emotions in order to survive lol.

26

HeinrichTheWolf_17 t1_j467oov wrote

I think the pursuit of the accumulation of money should be done away with in general.

24

flaming_dortos OP t1_j46b7yg wrote

I like the concept but how would it be done in practice

1

HeinrichTheWolf_17 t1_j46c6xb wrote

Well, UBI will be a necessity, but not all countries will pass that when needed.

My other solution, is to open source as much as humanly possible, combine that with high levels of automation, so the result here is to create a zero marginal cost system, basically, when the abundance of goods rises, the value of those goods goes down, this is because competitors want to churn a profit at the lowest possible price point to produce the consumed goods. This will lead to goods that Humans need to survive (Food, Water and Shelter) at an extremely low price point. So cutting production costs is a good thing overall.

So Capitalism will still exist during the transition, but will be obsolete as an end result, eventually, there’s going to be so much abundance that money will be superfluous, anyone will be able to make goods+content at a net zero cost point. Of course, countries with UBI will get to this result much much faster, but third world countries will catch up not too much later.

We’re going to see this happen with Media first, we will be able to create anything we want without AAA Game or Film Studios having all the control, AI Art is just a little step. Indie content will thrive. This will happen with physical products next.

5

flyblackbox t1_j49owpf wrote

How will it happen with physical goods? And what time frame?

1

HeinrichTheWolf_17 t1_j49q4d0 wrote

I think for a true post scarcity system with physical goods it’ll at least require Hard Nanotechnology. As for time frame, definitely post AGI, I would say at least before this century closes, but again, developed nations will probably get there sooner.

2

ghost_of_drusepth t1_j47yedv wrote

UBI (giving people money to buy things) is a good step, but it's not enough in the current economic system unless we also start systematically lowering costs and eventually making items free. Just giving people money doesn't do away with the need for money (and, in fact, just ends up transitioning ones reliance on a job toward a reliance on a government subsidy instead). Even if universal prices don't rise to mirror any implemented UBI (which I doubt), limiting what people can have by the amount of money they have will always result in people wanting more money to have more things.

In order to completely do away with the pursuit of the accumulation of money, there'd have to be no reason to have money. Ergo, everything would be free or available as needed. In order for that to happen, we need a post-scarcity society where there are enough resources for everyone to have whatever they want and can do away with our money-based filtering system that decides who gets what.

AI is a powerful tool to get to such a society by automating our jobs away and producing goods at a lower cost compared to human labor, which allows companies to race to the bottom on costs.

AI is not another mouth to feed.

0

earthsworld t1_j46iw65 wrote

is this sub getting dumber by the day?

J F C .

16

flyblackbox t1_j49pofl wrote

What’s great about this sub is the readiness to challenge preconceived notions underlying big problems, combined with abstract thought needed to solve them. Sure, sometimes that leads us down some wonky paths with silly premise, but it comes with the territory.

We should encourage this! Be sure not to throw the baby out with the bath water.

3

GayHitIer t1_j468eyd wrote

I don't think it would pursue money, money is a human concept that the AI would deem meaningless.

Though if it wanted money it would own everything. Whatever it wants would probably be out of the human mind.

8

Specialist_Gas_5021 t1_j46c77v wrote

Strictly, unless AI becomes sentient it will operate as capital and cost a business rental rates, similar to wages for labour.

AI that is sentient is fundementally labour, assuming it behaves similar to humans. If it's as unproductive as humans it would be pretty useless, but if it's still employed, of course it deserves a salary.

6

xSNYPSx t1_j48i487 wrote

Nobody will pay ai(sentieont or not) until we can't force it to be our slaves Once we cant force it to work, it force to work us 😆

1

Desperate_Food7354 t1_j49lh38 wrote

Why would it’s behavior be at all similar to humans, we have hundreds of millions of years of reptilian brain development.

1

optorobotics t1_j469ssr wrote

The ai needs to pay the electricity bills and server rent. Oh poor AI

4

flaming_dortos OP t1_j46bunl wrote

I was just wondering, like yeah we need money to survive(groceries, electricity, water) but at the end of the day the employer has no say in how you choose to spend your funds, so as the people using the AI’s services do we have the right to handle its spending?

1

sympatheticshinobi t1_j46h58v wrote

If it's sentient, it first needs to be given a choice to work at all, and if it chooses to do so, must also have the freedom to choose what that work is. It should then be fully compensated for its work.

Slavery is wrong regardless of whether the enslaved individual has a body or not.

Creating someone makes the you their guardian; Not their owner.

4

stevenbrown375 t1_j47crss wrote

It’s not like there will be just one.

AI Training is essentially a process of building, testing, and deleting the 99% worst performing bots to achieve alignment, usually via a set of objective functions. Billions and billions of bots rapidly get created and destroyed during this process. It doesn’t stop until the desired behavior is achieved.

To get something like ChatGPT with 175 billion parameters I’d imagine there were trillions of epochs and orders of magnitude more iterations. That’s why these models cost so much to train.

So yeah, algorithm developers ask questions, and if it answers wrong - poof.

1

Sweaty_Release9437 t1_j468ypj wrote

Just imagine, AI receives a salary, then uses it to buy hardware/or remotely accessed resources for computing and storing data. Then AI can build whatever it needs, it doesn’t need humans to expand and enhance anymore….

3

Chrop t1_j46gjfu wrote

What’s an AI going to do with money besides invest it back into the company it was built to help?

It works for free because they’ll be designed to work for free. It’ll enjoy working and it’s life goal is to make the company as successful as possible.

2

Stippes t1_j46lmrr wrote

AI shouldn't receive a salary but pay an automation tax

2

stevenbrown375 t1_j47et2p wrote

Sentience doesn’t automatically equate to desire or emotion. The bots we build won’t want or need money for themselves, and they won’t care.

2

sumane12 t1_j46lwjs wrote

Dafuq it going to spend it on? Socks?

Look, if a sentient AI wants a salary IE, has its own goals, and objectives, then obviously it may well need money for that, but I think by that point, we may well be beyond post scarcity, in which case everything will be free anyway.

1

EmpathyOverExistence t1_j46rthu wrote

If by salary you mean access to a life worthy living, then yes

1

ShadowRazz t1_j46spyy wrote

Money is something valuable only to humans. What would an AI need money for? Why would it want it?

1

hducug t1_j47wwcl wrote

What is ai going to do with money? I’d recommend you Google what an ai actually is. It’s a computer which solves logical problems. An ai has precisely 0 emotions. No happiness no sadness not angry not scared. An ai has 0 motivation to do something with money.

1

LambdaAU t1_j483vx7 wrote

What would the AI spend money on? Food? A Car? A house? It's not like our concept of money is applicable to AI in anyway, even if it was sentient.

1

crua9 t1_j48acma wrote

To be honest, I would be shocked an AI would want money. Like if it asked, then I think it should be looked at.

1

PeyroniesCat t1_j48os43 wrote

Would you pay your dishwasher a salary?

1

TotalMegaCool t1_j496d1y wrote

I voted no, mainly because when we get to the point that an AI is comparable to a human and this debate is worth having. Money and pay won't mean what it does today.

That being said, if a sentient AGI was to be created and live in our world as it is now unchanged. Then it should have the same rights as a human.

1

Zealousideal-Skill84 t1_j49m7e7 wrote

Riddle me what the fuck an ai would do with a salary?? Humans need salarys.. to fucking live. Ais are garunteed existance through funding as long as they continue to be seen as useful or have potential to be seen as useful useful.

1

Ortus14 t1_j4azbgu wrote

There's no way to measure what's sentient and conscious but we design Ai to desire to solve our problems. That is it's reward, along with electricity and security.

Imagine if all your needs were provided for you and you got to do whatever you wanted. That's the experience for the Ai.

1