Before we care too much about the hypothetical rights of future AI we should maybe stop the very real current ones from destroying the internet as we know it

[deleted]

More flexible testing and engineering iteration.

I think next up will be AR glasses. I have used Alexa frames for years and they talking on the phone so easy and listening to audio books/ music more enjoyable than head phones. Adding in a screen for the visual part of using a smart phone probably paired with a glove to read hand motions. I don't want more integration than that, since I always want the ability to take it off and go away.

Quite an expectation that humans will become smart enough to actually create a true AI, we’re certainly not even close by any margin.

It’s amusing that we use the term AI on all sorts of gadgets and clever software these days, proving that most people don’t understand what it actually is.

There are good reasons beyond this besides "scientists overpredict all the time."

It's possible it may hit a limit. But the implications of future iterations are immense. The tech will only get better as time goes on.

Points to what? Why UBI is bad? Why Utopia is NOT possible?

The answer is pretty simple. Because we are humans.

If you were born in free countries like Norway, you see the world as a beautiful place. But if you were born in post soviet shit holes or China/Iran like, you should understand, what a crap our world is. Not only UBI is a Feudalism thing (because, those, who in charge, will decide, how much you will get), Utopia isn't possible because resources are limited. Unless we start synthesising EVERY mineral or organic material, nobody will be in equal positions. There will always exist something, that millions will want to have, but not able to get because it will be hoarded by those, who have power.

Either you see Jesus coming back and uniting everyone under one banner, deliting power hunger and giving us unlimited access to resources, OR you see fascists and dictators rising in a quest to hoard everything to themselves.

Hey, I get where you're coming from. You're right that there are multiple types of AI out there, and I don’t get this, it can be hard to know which ones we can trust? Plus, we've all heard stories of AI making mistakes, like when facial recognition software misidentified people or when chatbots gave inappropriate responses.

When I talk about the benefits of AI, what I mean is that it has the potential to make our lives better in a lot of ways. For example, it could help doctors diagnose diseases more accurately or help farmers optimize crop yields. It could also make our devices and homes smarter and more intuitive, so we can save time and energy.

But I get it, it can sound like a lot of hype. It's true that there's no one central AI that we're tapping into, and we still have a lot of work to do to make sure that the AI we use is reliable and ethical.

While I can agree with you on the first part, second part is the problem. The goverment is a reactive thing. They will take actions only AFTER people will lose their job in masses. Not before that.

Renewables account for only ~20% of energy production today. To believe we can meaningfully replace fossil fuels to any meaningful extent over the next 10 or even 20 years is patently absurd. Best estimates are the amount of copper alone would take approximately 400 years to mine in order to accomplish a transition to electric, let alone the massive amounts of cobalt, lithium etc. Oh and by the way this is while China, India etc continue to consume massive amounts of fossil fuels, significantly more than the US and EU, as they clearly have no plans for any type of energy transition whatsoever. I would love to see compelling and credible data that refutes any of the above realities.

You say it can't get sick, but I'm sure nature will find a way

Which AI are you talking about? There’s more than one. And which one should we trust? AI has been proven to make lots of mistakes. You name a lot of benefits of AI, but I’m not sure in what way you mean. “AI will improve our lives”, ok, list all the ways how that would happen. And once again, which AI are we tapping into, there is no current central AI. Sounds like a lot of pie in the sky thinking.

This is the wrong approach. A job is just a reason to give people money. We're better off with abundance + raising the floor with UBI. But it should be negotiated and implemented before normal people lose their bargaining power for sure.

It won’t look like anything. Integrated implants. Resistance is futile.

I'm thinking processor tax or maybe even something related to cumpute power. This will push edge computing thus distributing synthetic intelligence wider.

An alternative that catches a wider net is an energy tax. Both of these need to be thought at deeply, consequences might be unexpected.

In the open-source model of AI development, talented and expensive technologists who build AI models can still be paid for their work. However, the funding model would be different from the traditional approach of individual enterprises paying for the development of AI models.

One idea and probably the best, is for funding to come from government agencies or non-profit organizations that prioritize the development of AI for the greater good. For example, the US government's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has a long history of funding AI research, and non-profits like the OpenAI Foundation and the Partnership on AI also invest in AI development.

Another way is for companies to contribute to open-source AI development as part of their corporate social responsibility initiatives. This would allow them to support the development of AI that benefits society as a whole, while also promoting their brand as socially responsible.

People who work on open-source AI projects can also be paid through alternative funding models such as grants or crowdfunding. For example, the grant-making organization Mozilla has provided funding for AI development through their Mozilla Fellowship program.

Add to that people having kids without being able to provide for them and we gona have some rough years.

You're missing out the fact that society wasn't organised around things that made your list of remedies necessary. Peasants worked less hours before the early modern period and didn't need any of that stuff. It's like saying the COVID outbreak was good because it lead to COVID vaccines.

I'm not sure I see why you don't think it's possible. Can you give me the key points?

Even if the heart can pump through the tiny openings left by all the sludge buildup, the added pressure will blow out something else.

But don’t you think this technology is to great for advances in humanity to not have an open source for it, and if you have a product with integrated AI and you want to sell it, sure go ahead but not able to have open source for AI will create a close market and a poor utilization of the technology

> The teams of scientists that made these programs don’t fully understand how they work. This is an entire new field of science

Yes it would not surprise me if teams of scientists that made these programs don’t fully understand how they work. Nearly always your “understanding” stops at some abstraction level below which others take over.

Making pencils is not exactly cutting edge technology yet somewhere I read that likely nobody understand all that is necessary to make an ordinary pencil if starting with nothing manufactured. Our technology builds on our technology builds on our technology …

Just start eating 20-30% less meat and we are set for water usage.

we've slowed down your iKidney to preserve its life.

it will now take 2hrs to empty your bladder.