|
gohmak posted:End thread. I love the book series but the main thing I've taken away from it is not the nature of governance but level of invasiveness government should have in individual lives, which is to say, as much as you want but within a certain minimum.
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 13:18 |
|
|
This all kind of assumes that AI has no rights as a person and if a corporation has personage rights I see a more compelling argument that AI would have rights. Manna talks about the socialist utopia giving everyone resources as needed to live and then they also get discretionary resources to allocate as they wish, which can be greater projects of mutual benefit to others, an example they give is a space elevator. I have always thought it a more compelling idea to speculate on the rights of abilities of AI as societal ghosts which are very real, could create economic and managerial impacts and only need some sort of digital device to communicate with.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
I think it's underestimated how much modern governments need more data people and I mean people to just enter, examine, maintain and curate data. There's a lot of work to be done and at the current rate of adoption and most municipality's citizens resistance to spending money on infrastructure and services in general, it will be 20+ years before the system will be organized enough to be able to impliment any automated processes. Of course if we changed our attitude about government to "poo poo should nominally work" instead of blaming government for its own self aware deficiency this could probably be tasked down to a fourth of the time. As it is it's hard to get software in government that isn't either an underdeveloped money sink or an over designed kludge that never quite does what an entity needs it to. I joke to my co-workers that one day government IT will be managing an army of AI but I really do mean that jokingly, we can't get them to authorize keeping the existing roads and buildings upright.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Socialism is ultimately a movement about sustainability as opposed to making sure everyone has equally grandiose and unnecessary extravagance.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:It's weird how people are willing to let random chance and individual decisions determine who lives in abundance and who dies, rather than a central politburo of technocrats and their pet AI, huh? I'm not convinced that's a choice that has to be made with the amount of waste currently in the system. The only thing that really needs to change in the Western diet is the focus on beef and outside of that I think we could elevate all of the existing rest of humanity to probably not equal but comparable and fair living standard. The world is vast and much of our "capital" is misallocated.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
Char posted:This is what scares me the most. If they can really improve efficiency by such factors, these tools will allow even more centralization of capital. This is the cutting edge of companies who already are close to the center of the centralization process. If you gave me the budget I could keep American workers occupied on just infrastructure for the indefinite future. Not like busy work and empty neighborhoods like China, like honest to God poo poo that needs to be done to maintain and improve the US for dozens of years. Its going to sound jingoistic but large reasons why China's investment over the past few years are not blossoming into a new economic renaissance is because of their lack of freedom to exploit it. When you regulate ideas, it will ensure economic stagnation because no one can act in a way outside the initial blessing of the party. Russia by contrast has gangster capitalism which is the only kind Putin knows, and has the extensive rent seeking and extraction of value from the infrastructure which prevents it from well accomplishing its purpose. Capitalism tempered by socialist regulation gives you the best of both. Infrastructure must be reliable and to bring this full circle AI will be added to infrastructure like businesses, travel and logistics as they prove to add reliability otherwise introduced by human error.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The CCP really does not give a poo poo in 99% of scenarios, or at least they value money more. China today is fairly similar to historical accounts of the US about 100 years ago, right down to the rivers that catch on fire and the blatant disregard for the environment. I'm sure if the US and Europe got firebombed in 30 years (like how we benefited in WW2) China would have economic dominance too. True, it has all been about "wealth" generation.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 13:18 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Pew's been on the ball lately with topical research surveys. A new just-released survey indicates that 65% of American workers expect that within 50 years, "much" of the work done by humans will instead be done by robots or computers. However, 80% of American workers believe that their own jobs will be around basically unchanged fifty years from now, and only 11% are concerned about losing their current job due to being replaced by computers/robots.  I'm pretty sure if my job is the same a year from now something catastrophic has happened generally speaking. Apparently people really are.that unimaginative.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2016 20:45
|
|