I knew about the accelerating pace of change back in the 2000s, but I only created my Reddit account in 2020. It differs from person to person.

Just came from futurology from what that's become... I'm no doomer and already happier here!

Just played with ad taglines on chatgpt. Blown away. Saved a week of creating!

>It's not doomerism to think that rich countries will get richer and have better access to tech.

Not every rich country will have the same legal approach to transformative technology. Also, wealth inequality means that the wealthy in middle income countries have access to western-level technology.

It's not doomerism to think that rich countries will get richer and have better access to tech.

That is literally a statement of past history.

Population growth: sure. I already said rich countries have declining pops so letting rejuvenated people have kids is what they would do at first.

So when Einstein wrote that letter to Roosevelt - telling him of the likelihood that a chain reaction could be created using Uranium to release massive amounts of energy - that was old news? I wonder why Einstein wasted his time telling the president what some high school chemistry teacher already knew all about?

>Stay plausible.

I don't believe you're important enough to be this arrogant.

How about we wait until the end of the century and see what happens? We have absolutely no idea what the AI revolution will reveal in terms of unknown unknowns. If you believe you're in a better position than me to predict the future you're either very well connected or delusional.

Also, please address my criticism of your unnecessary doomerism and re population growth.

That's a really healthy take on the issue, so thank you for posting it. I needed to read something like this .

>Just seems like we're seeing another example of the AI effect.

Is that "AI 'people' keep crying wolf, and now we've stopped believing them"?

How do the nanobots coordinate? Where do they get the replacement cells? How do they cut away a broken limb? What do they do with waste?

Stay plausible. Nanobots that magically heal injuries are more like stage magic.

A more plausible version: new organs or whole body subsections grown and built in the lab. Layer by layer, with inspections and functional tests. So the lab is certain each part is well made.

And then the "nanobots" are basically hacked human cells that go on the interfaces where there would be a scar otherwise. They on command will glue themselves to nearby cells and do a better job of healing than what would otherwise just be 2 human tissues held together with thread. So the patient can walk right after surgery because all the places their circulatory system and skin and so on were spliced is as strong as their normal tissue and doesn't hurt.

They also bridge nerve connections.

We could literally have organic nanobots capable of repairing every tissue in the body within the decade. The future is hard to predict under normal circumstances and we're far, far from that now.

What do you mean I "can't know this". You know how sports stars need surgeries when they wear out a joint or break a tendon, an injury that won't heal?

That's not even aging it can happen in your 20s. Treatments for aging alone at best restore your ability to heal from your early 20s.

If you are 80 years old and at a patient at the clinic lots of stuff will be damaged.

>1. Aging does some physical damage that won't heal.

You literally can't know this.

>2. They might if it results in severe overpopulation

Overpopulation is a factor of carrying capacity and we're currently very far from any kind of Malthusian limit. Also, there's actually been research done on this so there's no need for speculation.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3192186/

You're being needlessly doomish.

The sooner the better, I still think Ray Kurzweil prediction is the most solid one, but who knows really.

1. This is obvious and there is a risk of malware, etc. You understand that this isn't like taking metformin, it's probably massive surgery to remove old joints and skin and possibly just your whole body except for your brain and spine. Aging does some physical damage that won't heal.

After the many surgeries you have permanent implants and sensors installed that have to interface to local clinics and a network of ambulances etc. And you have to return for checkups and repairs periodically.

2. This is how that works now, also it's an ongoing process. You don't really get cured of aging just the condition managed

3. They might if it results in severe overpopulation

You're the one assuming that:

1. Therapies will be complex
2. Expensive clinics around the world would have poorer access
3. Any liberal democracy would force people to get sterilized to access life-saving medicine.

It's a dystopic masturbatory fantasy with no basis in reality and no need to boot. Why the hell would we want to slow down population growth while going through a catastrophic demographic collapse? Our birthrates are so bad that biological immortality would barely make a dent.

chat gpt-3 is just a marketing layer over top of gpt-3. it was a way of bringing more attention to the brand. whatever startup/competition this inspires will be closer to agi. some other company will release a more accurate version and openai will scramble to release gpt-4 at the last minute. you see it all the time. businesses underestimate the competition, they hold out on the release of better quality product and get undermined by a startup to only then release their product a year too late

Greetings and salutations new folks. Please make sure to check any doomer impulses at the door.

It only needs to be 99% accurate, not 100%.

Our culture places a lot of importance on relative value. It doesn't matter how good you are at something, its about how much better you are than other people. With AI, people can see it eroding their relative value and get defensive.

I think a lot of them are bot accounts

I think this take is correct. Showed my father how easy it is to deep fake and create fake video, he said "I will never trust anything I see online again". Lots of folks are already leaving social media and online connectedness behind, I kinda think it's a good thing...

People shouldn't trust what they see online. That's been the case for a long while... This is hopefully going to start solidifying our real world relationships again, something which has kinda been ruined due to social media.

I imagine that going forward tech will continue to advance rapidly.. But that we will see people push away from certain aspects of it, like being always online, always connected, and having a ton of social media sites.. Instead I think people are going to realize that everything online is easily fakable and live more here. With less of a focus on trying to appear the most popular on their social feed.. To me, it's the rebirth of people being genuine.

I'll probably pull back as well. Not in a luddite kind of way, but simply remove tech from the things I don't really need it for. I enjoy cooking on an open flame for example, I don't need a fancy electric oven. But I'll still watch movies at the end of the day. Likely movies which are dreamed up by our DVD player.

>The AI revolution will change human powered thinking to mechanical, but of course just like a motor is stronger than a human, can run 24/7, can be made bigger, etc, the same is true for AI

I agree with this, but the person I responded to said "right now."

It's the right now part that I'm taking issue with.

OpenAI's goal is research toward AGI, not revenue. When they have a sufficiently advanced machine, their plan is to basically ask the AI how to generate revenue. They aren't there yet, and the investors are fully aware of this.

To be fair, I didn't say all, and clinical depression is leagues different than a feeling of depression, to be very clear, and at no point did I say anything at all regarding your second sentence. Please reread.