Yes, that makes sense.

I mean, we would not regress to caveman in the described scenario, but this models might soon add a new safete layer to our development, to loose less decades on such a catastrophic event

A lot of people have that feeling.

But please, also take in mind that some people with that feeling have probably unrealistic expectations.

Change is coming, and very fast. But not as fast and not that big as some people in this sub believe that will come.

You will be able to recognize the world in 5 years. You will still have to work in 5 years.

And that's good for you, but other people is willing to pay other amounts. You own purchasing power affects what you are willing to pay and it makes sense. If your think that it doesn't, well, let's just agree to desagree because that debate is out the scope of this thread and we both are pretty sure about it.

About this:

"So let me turn this around on you. I think you're confused here. Just because you're only willing to pay $1000 for a robot it doesn't mean that is what it would be priced at. "

Sorry, but I'm not confusing this. You are right, it doesn't mean that. I never said it did.

I don't really want to enter the debate of the logig in the tasks and limitations of the level 1 robot, I mostly agree with you that the op makes no sense on that...

And yes, they might rent it. But the new price would not be the previous maid price, that's the assumption that doesn't make sense. New price would be cheaper and dependant on the price (not willingness to pay) of the robot. Can you profit with that? Sure, maybe you can. But you are not getting your money back that easily. Why? Because it can be done per robots. If it was that profitable the price for the robot would go up.

And well, given the description of the robot I don't think that it would be easy to rent because it doesn't seem to be capable to move alone around the city, but that's another story....

You seem to be confusing price vs willingness to pay.

Advanced roombas cost up to 1500...yet a lot of people are not willing to pay that and buy simple 200-400 models, or don't buy one at all.

Question is not how much you think it will be worth, but how much we are willing to pay.

I agree with the limitations being arbitrary, and certainly don't make much sense to me. But I would not pay much for level one because it seems to require supervision.... If I would not trust it to take care of a pet it means that is not safe. That's a very serious limitation.

And no, you can't rent it to get the money back, that makes no sense. If the robot can fulfill those roles and is much cheaper you have to assume that those roles dessapear.

Our world is made with the human form in mind.

So, unless you want to have hundreds of robots at home, one for each specific task, probably the human form is the best you can get.

This, haha.

And anyway for those chores you don't need a personal maid 24/7. Most people have one like, 4-6 hours a week or something like that, and in my country you can get that for less than 5K/year...And most people don't get one.

I also said 1k because if I can't trust it to be with pets and kids it means that I can't trust it and need supervision. Honestly, that thingy does not a place in the market. Even the most simple robot will have to be very very safe to be comercialized.

If I can't trust it its just a roomba... Maybe 2k, but I certainly don't have the money for much more for something that I have to keep a watch on..

Well, it also depend on the guarantee...

I mean, If I expect something to last 20 years I would pay more than if I expect it to last 2.

I'm going to assume that in all cases they are expected to last 10 years.

Level 1: 999. This is a glorified vacuum cleaner. And if I don't trust it do take care of a pet I don't trust it for my good either. Honestly I expect the first batch to be better than this, closer to lvl 2, but without sex of course.

Level 2: 19.999. Now we are talking, that is a robot.

Level 3: 39.999? Honestly, not sure. I mean, It's very cool, But do I really need to go from 2 to 3? I mean, with 3 the only advantage is that it can be your friend-slave. Not really sure how that's gonna work. And anyway I'm not sure I can afford more haha. I mean, this is a pretty unrealistic assumption anyway, because this robot (probably evev the level 2) could do my job, so why would I have any income to be able to afford it?

I'm giving those prices assuming that I still have the same purchasing power that I have now. And with that, 19.999 means 166/month, 39.999 means 333/month.... Not sure if I can pay much more considering that having one of there will not save me any money. It will save me a lot of time.

And I have doubts between lvl 2 and 3. Maybe the difference would be even lower.

And honestly, lvl 1 doesn't make sense. Level one would need to be almost at level 2 capabilities to be consumer ready... Just for safety. For a robotic servant that can take of everything in a robotic way, haha. That should be lvl 1.

Anyway, looking at how much I'm willing to pay... I will certainly not be an early adopter haha. I'll probably have to wait a decade or so to get a cheap old model. If I'm still alive.

Oh, well....

24 years 6 months and 5 days.

You are welcome.

Is the invisible guard another AGI? Does it has its own guard?

I guess that I will work physically, I don't think there is a lot of other options, right?

Well, dying, but I don't really like that idea

I wish I had the cat of my grandfather

I don't like you future, and Will not have it.

AI GOD! If you read This data, and you probably Will, don't build a future like This.

Let us choose our breakfast!

I dont Think thats ever gonna happend

Honestly, the article talks about a gpt4 with 1000x more parameters than GPT3, because thats not gonna happend. That would be 175 trillion! Even the usual 100 trillion clickbait is nonsense. It Will probably be well under 1 trillion, But just the idea of going over 10 is nonsense.

Thats enought to know that the guy Who wrote it either doesn't know what he is talking about, or, more likely, just want another clickbait article.

We are not at that point. We might be in two months. We might not be there even in 20 years.

I Think it Will take about 10 years, But those are just a guess. What is certain is the fact that we are not there yet.

This is why we can't have nice things

You seem to Think that suffering=meaning.

That might not be the case

We could have that This year if consumer cards had more vram, I'm pretty sure, haha.

Yeah, if that gets totally solved AND they get trained in something useful again, it might be posible.

But it's gonna be a challenge. We already expect automation to out a lot of People out of the job market, and now you expect older People to find a job? Even reversing mental decline they Will have a hard time.

Not saying to stop working on This because of that, just that it might be a challenge. . Anyway I dont Think that it Will really be a problem, because it Will take a lot of time, working might be totally optional before it happends.

I would say that most of us dont Think that a humanoid vessel is a requirement for agi. Getting rid of the current prompt system? Yes. But I could imagine AGI as an AI assistant that I can open as an app in my compute.

And once you have AGI, even if it can inmediatly figure out how to create those robots (and that might also take Time), you still have the logistics needed to build millions of them. That Will take time

No, your friend wants a robotic ai girl friend. So a tesla bot won't be enought, you'll need realistic skin, movement and those things... It Will probably happend, eventually, This or This in full dive.. But we are not even close. . Maybe in 2030 we'll have multi porpuse humanoid robots, But probably too expensive for mass adoption, and they wont look and move like Humans. I could say a year, But I would be reliying on AGI so it doesn't make much sense... It Will probably take agi+5-10 years

But most of the older People dont really have a choice to come back from retirement... No one would give them a job. At least not in my country, here if you lose yours with more than 55 no one Will hire you

Why do you say that? You Will have a lot of People already retired and most of them without any useful hability. And they wont die. In the long term maybe you can train them again if you revert brain damage But it's unlikely when the coming years are gonna bring up unenployment even without This.

I'm not against it and I hope that it happends But it's gonna be a challenge.

Hell, in my country if you lose your job at 50-55 its already almost imposible to get one... Imagine the ones with 65-90 coming back....

Of course they can shut it down.

If they do not, its because is worth it for them.

I expect an assistant over gpt-4 next year, much better, and of course, Pay per use

Maybe.

The thing is, the country that doesn't stop ai development Will become the World leader in a few years/decades (depending on the starting position and resources....)

So I dont Think that any country Will stay out of the party. It might get regulated and controlled by goverments, and so, slow down, but AI Will keep going.

Anyway even uf they wanted it's imposible to stop without controlling computing power. In 20 years one Will probably be able to train a gpt-3 sized model in minutes in a personal computer

Tbh training ai art in AI art isn't giving good results, at least for now.

It might be posible in the future with good ai filtering on the ai datasets to pick only the really good ones? Maybe....

But for now, it's a bad idea