World leaders know news isn’t for info, it’s for dissemination of state ideas. Especially in Russia

Sort of. If you look at the states for under 30 it’s a lot different tho. I would highly recommend finding a website or app that lets you talk to people from different countries.

It’s a lot like the war in Iraq, if you asked a 55 year old at the time there’s a good chance they would support it, if you ask a 25 year old there’s a good chance they don’t.

They’re saying each print costs up at 5 cents, so that’s only 20 prompts for $1, kinda spendy.

I mean yes obv, but even then if you have no income you have to start selling stock and you’ll eventually run out unless you’re owning something.

The issue I’m seeing is that the populations would be in two and a half classes: unemployed low skill people, employed high skill people(things needed after AI, so like notaries, maybe doctors, entertainers, people to work on/monitor AI) and AI owning people(large investors in openai, connected people, etc.)

Eventually they will realize that using their ai/robot labor power to feed house and fund the unemployed lower skill people doesn’t help their goals, so they will spend less over time. This will happen faster with competition, the more you spend on the non-ai owning class, the further you get behind the people who don’t.

If this continues the unemployed former working class will be functionally pushed from society, they won’t be able to use their work as a method of negotiation, like labor unions etc. our lives will be at the whim of people who already clearly don’t care if we’re poor. What happens when they don’t need us at all?

Voting is an opinion poll for the elites riot tax(five just enough so they don’t flip).

No, as in 60% of Americans are paycheck to paycheck or are relying on debt in one way or another.

I totally agree. Around 2018 it became normalized that china needs to be “defeated”, and there are constant articles about the “Chinese threat”. Like I get competing economically, but it’s looking like war might be on the table in there coming decades.

That gap is like 35% of the population, if that.

I see a future that groups of regular people, however they find eachother, will invest in training an ai model to accomplish a simple job very well, let’s say an automated call center. They can then be contracted by other companies who need customer service.

I like the idea of people having their own piece of the ai market because in most of human history our labor was a negotiation tool.

Exactly. Money will become a thing of the poor, like food stamps. Slowly lowering, year by year, with average citizens having zero control of their situation or the outcome of their lives.

Yes ai needs trainers, but 1000 trainers can make a simple but concise model that replaces 500,000 jobs, call centers are an easy example. And then they have to make another model that takes more jobs if they want to keep theirs.

The new jobs from the AI market won’t match the jobs lost from AI replacement. Think about it this way, a company wouldn’t new tech unless it saves them money right?

To be a little conspiratorial what if the current tensions over China are being instigated by this?

Like Taiwan makes ~90% of the worlds computer chips. The United States recently sanctioned China from our AI chip and software industry, and we are sending cruisers to the South China Sea with nukes.

The futures looking bright. Very, very, skin burning bright 😎

Yes but as soon as one company/organization can vertically integrate food, energy, industry, and healthcare they won’t.

AI could simply work for them instead of for a consumer, they wouldn’t have a need for money, they wouldn’t need to buy anything.

No need for consumers if the upper class is the only consumer.

I agree, but you could compensate rather easily by simply paying for 2x AI for 1/100th the cost of one human and one AI.

I agree that skilled jobs will be humans and AI together, but unskilled labor is called that for a reason, they aren’t focused on the quality, but the quantity.

I’m of the opinion that maybe it’s intentional none of the people we are able to vote for end up helping us.

Tell that to every population avoidably/intentionally starved in the last century 👀

It can and does happen

This is true, but simple things can be handled by ai alone. And huge portions of are economy are simple enough it can do it alone. It is far, far cheaper to pay for AI than to pay for a human.

Mate we’ve been voting for a while and we just keep getting poorer while our productivity skyrockets.

I agree completely about the arms race. I really think this is tantamount with the creation of the nuclear bomb. What scares me though is, like much technology, either will or has already been used by military orgs. Think about a mass gpt powered disinformation campaign. Ten million twitter users intelligently arguing disinformation, debating points, and seeding information. Scary stuff.

The issue I’m seeing is that the populations would be in two and a half classes: unemployed low skill people, employed high skill people(things needed after AI, so like notaries, maybe doctors, entertainers, people to work on/monitor AI) and AI owning people(large investors in openai, connected people, etc.)

Eventually they will realize that using their ai/robot labor power to feed house and fund the unemployed lower skill people doesn’t help their goals, so they will spend less over time. This will happen faster with competition, the more you spend on the non-ai owning class, the further you get behind the people who don’t.

If this continues the unemployed former working class will be functionally pushed from society, they won’t be able to use their work as a method of negotiation, like labor unions etc. our lives will be at the whim of people who already clearly don’t care if we’re poor. What happens when they don’t need us at all?

Yes but which humans and how. In the scenario I fear, AI would be laboring for the projects of the people who own it. Eventually over time one of the people who own ai/robot labor will decide that non-skilled unemployed people(most of us at this point) are useless overhead, we should spend less on keeping them alive.

Think about it this way, what are humans laboring for now? A:provide for eachother, food medicine etc to keep labor pool alive and healthy and B: demands of the rich and powerful. What if suddenly reason A becomes useless overhead(human labor useless for production, why waste ai power/labor on having them live comfortable lives), if you were to cut it out you have more power/money for B. Because the severe stratification of power, only those of the owning AI class will be able to make these decisions, and they are more than a little biased.

People have committed genocide over less

I think because they want to be the ones in control of the product or company, for maximum revenue.

They have no need for money if they own the means of production. If their goal is to gain power, and they have infinite AI power, we only represent a threat right? Or am I misunderstanding. In the scenario I am imagining money would likely be abandoned or heavily altered. Or, rich wouldn’t need money, money becomes a thing of the poor, a kind of food stamps.

Themselves. There are probably a few millions people worldwide that would be the people profiting off of ai. Profit isn’t right word, more like use ai for whatever they want, we just get in the way