An abundance of extremely cheap goods and services disproportionately helps the poorest people. Jeff Bezos can already have whatever he wants, do whatever he wants, whenever he wants. So it won't be a dramatic difference for people who are already extraordinarily wealthy. On the other hand, the lives of the poorest people will be improved by like 1000x.

The issue is figuring out if scale is all you need to replicate a human mind. I definitely don't think scale is all you need and its going to take a long time to truly replicate the human mind

And how will this benefit the poor exactly?

I'm so tired of these pointless one liner comments. Do people honestly think these "rich get richer and we are all screwed" comments are actually adding anything of value?

If people want to make this argument, for gods sake please just add some level of original thought. These sheep comments aren't helping anyone.

What should we be watching out for? How might we prevent this from happening?Historically is there a similar situation?

Or maybe take the opportunity to respond to the OP instead circling around to the same talking point.

But a copy of you isn't you. Also, unless the copy is alive, it's just another machine.

We can already replicate ourselves. It seems much more ethical, efficient, and definitive to simply find ways to make humans more capable.

Well, being richness is relative. If rich are the scum of the earth, most Americans and Western Europeans can be safely called scum of the earth by Russians and Central Asians.

And by succeeding I mean multiplying inherited wealth. Turning millions into billions. Not as common as people think.

Winners - Adaptable and creative people who effectively use the new tools

Losers - Anybody who wants things to be the same as they were before

I expect everyone (especially the poorest people in society) to be huge winners, except for the Marxists and Luddites who will have to deal with the painful realization that they were completely wrong about how the world works

Humanity

1. Because the rich and powerful will hoard in all the advantages AI has to offer
2. creating a larger group of people in poverty
3. setting the foundation for revolution which will
4. divide the power over capital good evenly in society

Submitted a paper doesn’t equal quality or truth. Not buying it without review and reproduction.

Ok, but how would anyone go about testing this? This is a claim that sounds extremely outlandish and needs some solid proof backing it.

Probably for some things, but currently, a family dr's schedule is insane, just rushing from one room to the next, talking to you for 10 minutes and they're out. If at home diagnostics become widespread (and I agree, I think they will and it's already happening), then the doctor has less to sort through. Little Jimmy with a cough doesn't need to come in because the at home diagnostics say, "it's just some allergies." That's one less patient for the doctor to see so they can spend more time dealing with higher level health problems.

There's a concept in medicine called "operating at the top of your license." That is, the MD should be spending most of their time dealing with the really tough cases and not wasting their deep knowledge on Little Jimmy's cough. It's one of the lines that gets trumpeted a bunch - AI liberates you to focus on more meaningful work. That's true. It's also code for lower level job replacement. Family doctors are going to need fewer nurses and physician assistants.

I was saying that with this in the back of my brain, I understand that its already happening but AI will make it so much worse.

Assuming that people need complete answers to not use their brains is surprisingly charitable even only considering the last decade.

It all comes down to Data capacity and computing power. That’s all it comes down to. If every function can be stored and every function could be simulated then a human can be printed in the next 30 years. Artificial Generalized intelligence will be real by 2026. Some say it already is but it will be concrete in 2026. This tech will be broadly realized by 2030. this is a fact.

5th amendment only protects you from incriminating yourself in potential criminal proceedings.

It does not prevent your employer from mandating you use it at work and then any data gathered being subpoenaed.

Or let's say it becomes something more ubiquitous like a smartphone, everyone uses it daily and all that data is gathered - your 5th amendment isn't going to do shit.

winners: corporations

losers: nations, institutions, unions, families, and people

I have no medical background so I have no idea if this could be true but my guess in the later stages of AI general practitioner/family doctors will be affected. AI Diagnosis at home would catch things early and offer solutions.

We will all get dumber, computers will all get smarter.

[removed]

No I mean what is consciousness?

Even if this was possible. The 5th amendment would absolutely protect against this kind of thing in the US.

I feel like you have to be unreasonably pessimistic to think that those would be the 1st areas where such a technology is used.

Aside from task automation and what that means for jobs, the first losers will be people who are just starting their careers. When you're starting out, you don't know shit. Even with a college degree or two, you don't know anything. There's a lot about a career that you can only learn by doing.

So what happens when the lowest level tasks are taken care of by AI, and all you really need is someone with experience to validate the outputs? Take copywriting. You can easily use prompts to churn out copy, but it won't be perfect. It will miss some key phrasing, might include points that don't need to be there, maybe there are additional marketing messages to weave in. But on the whole, the drafting part of the writing is automated.

Now, if I'm the business leader, I don't want some very junior person validating those outputs. They don't know what to look for. They probably could not even write it as well as the AI. If I'm a business, I don't need junior people, I just need 1 or 2 experts.

The consequence is that getting into a career and earning your place is going to get very difficult. If you're in high school or college right now, the way I started my career and the way you're going to start it are really different. I don't know yet how we will overcome this as a society. If you remove opportunities to learn, then humans will perpetually lose skills as they are automated. How do you become a copywriter if no one needs you and your newly minted bachelors in communications? How do you become an expert without experience? That's going to be a huge issue going forward, and I don't know of anyone with a real answer for it.

[removed]

I basically agree with you, but that’s not what most other people think. They believe the world was created by a benevolent entity and that the things that we do have meaning. It’s pretty common for people who lose that faith to suffer a crisis of meaning. Now imagine everyone on earth experiencing that at the same time.