What if transportation and other such jobs are automated before military tech gets good. Where unemployment is massive but militaries aren’t automated yet.

Yeah we could if not for an NDA. Or look for other jobs where Chat GPT is leveraged.

I think there will always be people out there who will need a massage. Also maybe setup an ASMR channel? Who knows. Or if ASMR will be a thing in the future.

I feel that lawyers will also have an easy time during the transition.

I work in healthcare. Not that we're immune, but red tape will keep us 10 years behind.

I want a set that would emulate living in an accurate (enough) any historical period and place.

Presumably all AI companies except the one that "wins" will become defunct.

Calculator replaced computers (people who did calculations) though. When the tool will become advanced enough for software architect or CEO to effectively wield it, it will spell the beginning of the end for programmers. I expect 10-20 years till then.

Slowing down seems more like wishful thinking than a poorly rolled out ubi solution because we didn’t.

In the hierarchy of needs you’re talking about a vanity project, not a necessity, and one that is primarily utilized by a sliver of the population.

Only 7% report going to the library weekly, 1/6 of the population never goes.

If there is a market for a “third place”, the private sector will step in (see: Starbucks). If there is demand for libraries or internet cafes the private sector will step in. There is no reason for the public to fund this particular legacy institution.

13 billion dollars per year spent on public libraries. To put that in perspective, the amount we spend on libraries is equal to the 77th largest world economy by GDP (out of 163 total).

Like I said, that funding could be put to actual good use, like housing the homeless.

An invasion of immortal rats, more than zombie apocalypse

(joke)

Libraries are public spaces; As well as storing books/information they serve a very useful function as a community hub for social events and act as a non-commoditised Third Place away from either work or home - important for mental health and social cohesion.

The race is to be the first company to use ChatGPT in a unique productizable way

But is it your room if the AI made it? I can see it’s uses, but AI art has no soul.

Edit; AI is a tool, tools can be great, but when your tool does all the work for you then you become the tool.

[deleted]

As I'm sure you know, supercomputers these days are racks of nodes with fast interconnects. In that way, they are distributed, just housed in a single location. It's the software that allows the resources to be allocated to however many applications are running on one at any given time. I believe most of these supercomputers actually are running different applications at once, except maybe when they're being benchmarked. I don't think it's any less legitimate to call an AuroraX5 a single system than it is to call Aurora itself a single system. (You might call a node the smallest single system unit of a supercomputer, but even then, Aurora's nodes are 2 Xeon processors and 6 Xe GPUs.)

But yeah, I don't know how the scaling works. Maybe you really need to build an AuroraX7 or X10 to get to 10 exaFLOPS instead of just X5. The point is that if you just care about having raw computing power reach a specific level, the only thing really stopping you is money.

You certainly aren't! I've been thinking about this lately (it's all I think about these days... such dull imagination of mine) but I have fears about viability. I think it's an arms race between Neuralink, DARPA, and Valve to see who makes a working BCI first.

I work with people and hope they're still here after the Singularity. For the time I spare due to AI, mainly bureaucracy, I will work part time on my future farm, growing some special plants with tegridy.

I recommend everyone with this idea to give this a watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62RJv514ijQ

My purpose is to look at pictures of frogs and buy transformers and so far I’m doing a great job.

Just call me Swanson. I’m quite good at woodwork too.

My point is you can’t judge intelligence based on social utility. I objectively do some things in my job that many people would find difficult, but I also can’t do a bunch of standard social things that most people find easy.

The new large language models are pretty smart by any criteria. They can write code, create analogies, compose fiction, imitate other writers, etc, but without controls they will also happily help you dispose of a body or cook up a batch of meth.

Chat GPT has been taught ethics by its coders. GPT-3 on the other hand doesn’t have an ethics filter. I can give it more and more capabilities but ethics have so far failed to materialise. I can ask it to explain why Hitler was right and it will do so. I can get it to write an essay on the pros and cons of racism and it will oblige. If I enumerate the benefit of genocide, it will agree with me.

These are bad things that will lead to bad results if they are not handled.

Guessing or hoping?

I think this would require more than BCI. Unless you just have the BCI picking up speech signals from the person's brain, and transferring them into text to speech data through a synthetic voice.

I don't think that you have to simulate a human brain to get intelligence, either. I discuss that toward the end of my comment. But the OP asked about counterarguments to the Kurzweil timeline for AGI. Kurzweil explicitly bases his timeline on the those two factors: computing power and a good enough brain model to simulate in real time. I don't think that the neuroscience will be there in 6 years to meet Kurzweil's timeline.

If we get AGI in 2029, it will likely be specifically because some other architecture does work. It won't be because Kurzweil was correct. In some writings, Kurzweil goes further and says that we'll have this model of the brain, because we'll have this really amazing nanotech in the late 2020s that will be able to non-invasively map all the synapses, activation states of neurons, etc. I'm not particularly up on that literature, but I don't think we're anywhere close to having that tech. I expect that we'll need AGI/ASI, first, to get there before 2100.

With regards to your own thinking, you only mention computing power. Do you think that intelligence is emergent given a system that produces enough FLOPS? Or do you think that we'll just have enough spare computing power to analyze data, run weak AI, etc., that will help us discover how to make an AGI? I don't believe that intelligence is emergent based on processing power, or else today's top supercomputers would be AGIs already, as they surpass most estimates of the human brain's computational capabilities. That implies that architecture is important. Today, we don't really have ideas that will confidently produce an AGI other than a simulated brain. But maybe we'll come up with a plan in the next couple of decades. (I am really interested to see what a LLM with a memory, some fact-checking heuristics, ability to constantly retrain, and some additional modalities would be like.)

I'm an author and I am eager to combine AI, VR, and storytelling/worldbuilding. I think it would be amazing to feed prompts and prose to an AI and have it create a VR room for my readers to explore.

I think AI and VR combined, and guided by a human artist, open up fascinating new possibilities for how we experience and interact with all the arts.