In an ideal world we’d eliminate high energy costs using fusion altogether, but I’m sure politics will come into play at some point and fuck over the consumer

I think the idea with fusion is less-so economics and more-so the sheer scale of the things we’ll be able to power with clean energy.

Cybersecurity is already a huge industry, and I project it will become far bigger in the future. In my old job, the protocols required just to access the necessary applications already consumed a lot of the workday. I imagine ai will make this process far more efficient.

Once we get to AGI, I imagine it will be a battle of which country has the strongest ai. I doubt whatever North Korea or Russia develop will be able to penetrate the defence of the US, if it’s also running an ai to protect the machines on its grid.

If these people were factory workers in the 1800s, they’d be proclaiming that the steam engine is the work of satan.

It’s a survival instinct against something capable of taking their jobs, that will only get better with time. Already an AI artwork won a prize, and this is the first legitimate iteration of AI artwork I know of.

On the flipside, art for me has always served as testament to the ingenuity of the human mind. Whilst an ai can produce greater quality, I don’t see proclamation for its capabilities stretching beyond works that hang on the mantlepiece of someone’s house. True art will always remain in the human domain.

On the flipside of that, art is a complete joke nowadays. A perverse money-laundering scheme that spits in the face of the public. If an ai can create anything more meaningful than 3 red dots on a canvas, I invite it to. Artists did this to themselves

Honestly to me the entire purpose of primary school (up to age 11 where I am) is socialisation. Under-socialised humans become ostracised by the rest of society. Secondary school (up to age 18) is to try a few flavours of different fields, assess your capabilities, and choose your specialisation, as well as what you’ve mentioned.

It’s going to take some very intelligent people to reshape education in a world of AI. Unfortunately politicians don’t strike me as being well-rounded in their problem solving skills

Yeah, the competitive edge GPT3 has over humans right now is speed. It can cut the bullshit of having to read and memorise to kill a mockingbird and get straight to interpolating the themes in the book, for example. Whether it can perform these interpolations better than a human, I doubt. As op mentioned, GPT3 has an IQ of 110. That’s better than average, but your A+ students are going to be more intelligent, perhaps far more. They can use GPT3 as a crutch on which they can build arguments, but ultimately the final product will be up to them. Of course, if you’re a student with an IQ of 80 struggling by, this tech is revolutionary. It will already completely reshape education, and we’re not even at GPT4. Presumably it will eliminate coursework based- assignments in favour of exams. You could be an art student studying themes of religion, and literally repaint DALLE-2 images, and I’d imagine end up with a good grade.

I see people as taking more of a quality assurance position, in the near future. Making sure what the AI produces is actually correct within the context of society. For example, designing a marketing campaign for kids crayons. I could see a scenario where the AI would draw on its vast wealth of knowledge, see that sex sells, and end up with an entirely inappropriate campaign. It would require a human to input the right parameters and subsequently check the work the AI has done. This is the only use I see for humans in most corporate fields, going forward.

Ultimately, GPT3 to me is the steam engine of AI. We have this fancy new tool that needs to be put to work. I can’t believe I’m alive to see the beginning of a revolution, arguably the most important revolution in all of time. One which will make our species redundant.

What I really would like to see in the future is neural interfacing; merge AI capability with human sensibility. Return the power back to the human race. Can you imagine how quickly we’ll breeze through the Kardashev scale if everyone had the intellect of einstein, or the creativity of Da Vinci? Exciting time to be alive

We have to embrace it. Being opposed to it would be like running a farm without tractors. The difference is that this is far more exciting, with much more far-reaching implications. I’m tentatively positive, but at the very least I can say I’ve submitted to it

Hmm, I think cataloguing ourselves is inherent to our behaviour, as it has been since the dawn of time. There are countless examples going back as far as tribal warfare. What technology has done is allowed us to connect with impossibly niche sects of civilisation and attached labels to that. Gender diversity, for example, has an incidence rate of .2% in the general population. Pre internet, and am certainly pre industrialisation, it’s probable that there would be a handful at best of people who identify as non-binary, for example, and the chances of 2 non-binary people meeting would be astronomically low, and thus as an identity, or cataloguing method, would have been impossible to attach a label to, as there simply wasn’t the critical mass needed to form the community. So I don’t think there’s an AI pulling the strings, but you’re absolutely right, we’ve categorised ourselves so well it would be much easier for an ai to glean information from the general population as opposed to, say, 50 years ago

I went into automation for this reason, and the jobs are going fast. The rise of Software as a Service platforms have enabled clients to streamline their employee base down to a few people who use the software to input some details and liaise with our company, but soon even they will be made redundant. I’m hoping my sector will be one of the last to go, since we’re the ones effectively creating the level of automation that can do someone’s job for them

Would the data not exist already? You have every message in every social media site, millions of recorded calls between all strata of society, a litany of anthropological, psychological, psychiatric, sociopolitical and sociological research papers, and neuroscience which map out human behavioural characteristics. From this, at the very least an ai can extrapolate on the data using parameters set out in the scientific literature to best approximate a way to solve a lot of global issues.

What we know from the psychology behind advertisements is that it’s very easy to create associations in the human brain with very subtle imagery. Tobacco made billions because in every film or advert that featured smoking it was closely associated with sex, being held in the hand of a beautiful woman or a James Bond type whilst they engaged in their dalliance. Hell, amphetamines were labelled as weight loss pills and made a fortune.

Even today, there are AI-generated popular culture characters you can talk to online which are scarily realistic, and that’s based off just a few minutes or hours of screen time. I don’t think that within the next decade there won’t come an AI that can reasonably do this with the gigantic amount of information you’d be able to provide it