Before I would think this comment was written by a bot but now they're much better than this 🤔

Or brain transplants.

> Your arguments apply equally to health care, social security, Medicare/Medicaid, etc

Well, I live in a high-tax, high-benefit country.

You're thinking too small. By the time AI can do that you're in the self-improvement ASI loop and predicting what that looks like might make your brain melt.

Your arguments apply equally to health care, social security, Medicare/Medicaid, etc.

A lot of these programs are already underfunded to the point that they are expected to collapse in the next decade.

These are programs that are aimed squarely at helping the lower and middle classes.

And all is takes is the mention of raising taxes to change election outcomes.

This is what annoys me most, everyone says humanoid robots would be perfect because they can work 24/7 without breaks. Well that's just a blatant lie, as you have stated already, current battery technology is utter crap for this use case.

Unless we can get batteries that can last 8+ hours, and fast charge, we aint gonna be seeing humanoid robots in stores/factories for a long time.

Unless you just attach a permanent power cable to the thing, which just would not work for many jobs.

So I'm reasonably high earning, and a pretty big chunk of my money already goes on taxes. If you earn around the median wage you actually net negative when it comes to taxes paid vs benefits received. The well-off already pay the majority of taxes.

So say we get AGI in 2024, and companies start laying off people en masse in 2025, and unemployment is steadily increasing.

The people who make the decision on how to manage this are the politicians, and they rely on votes. So the first they will do (in Europe) is probably to put a moratorium on people being laid off because they have been replaced by AI.

Meanwhile unemployment will continue to increase, just a bit more slowly.

As the situation develops and companies complain that they are not being allowed to be as productive as they could be due to regulation (actually a common situation for any safety regulation for example) there will come a need for resolution.

Since 2024 everyone would have been discussion UBI, and the groundswell for this will increase. There will be marches for UBI in the street, and talking heads will raise it constantly on the TV.

So eventually the government agrees to implement a UBI tax on companies based on their revenue and pay a living wage stipend to everyone. Because everyone gets money there would be broad support from the populace.

Companies are allowed to freeze hiring and slowly empty out their offices, but maintain their revenue, and then we have UBI.

No.

The people who would be expected to pay for it are the same people you expect to enact it.

Try looking at it from the perspective of the people you expect to pay for it, then ask yourself what they are likely to do.

you can even ask it for its confidence:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtificialInteligence/comments/11s1bb7/ask_gpt4_or_bing_for_confidence_levels_to_catch/

I've seen this done before but I'd like to see more research on the effectiveness of it.

Yes you could, the specific implementation is irrelevant, the big thing is that it can estimate the confidence at all

imagine a specifically trained AI, trainign data is all the technical documanetation on this entire world that one can get its hands on. it knows every protocol, every standard, every syntax. it can distill the functionality of every product down to its core feature and emulate that, just by descriptions of what the software supposedly does. It can absorb these tools into itself, get rid of the clutter and be straight to the point. A holistic technical mind, no fatigue, no pause, no error. someday it may improve on these absorbed algorithms and invent entirely new ones since it, as the only entity so far, has an integrated understanding of the whole IT world (or - why stop there - the whole technical world, the whole scientifc world - rappidly taking about agi here...) and just knows whats possible becasue it has the entireity of computing mapped and linked as its state of mind permanently.

obviously im an amateur and enthusiast, optimist or just straight up lunatic, but man, it feels real what is coming.

Couldn't you just have it tell you how confident it is. Like put a little bar next to the output that the more full it is the more confident etc it is to warn users.

I suspect there would be initial teething problems, but any new system would have those be it traditional updates or this AI thing. Even if it didnt "replace" the underlying code it could also just operate the old systems. Like in your heating example you tell it to make the temperature X and it can tweak the settings in the old program for you, acting as a natural language intermediary. This has the advantage of probably being easier maybe with old equipment.

So you could create a prompt that only provides a response if the confidence is greater than X.

Prompt:

You are a language model, I will provide you with an answer and a confidence score for each response. Please input your question and specify the minimum confidence threshold (default is 60%):

Question: {your_question_here} Confidence threshold: {desired_threshold_here}

Reply with “Confidence system enable.” to begin.

[removed]

Sounds good to me at first glance.

And of course it's for a community of unaugmented humans with ASI from the sounds of it.

AI will lead to scientific breakthroughs in every field known to man … thus it is near impossible to predict what may happen as we have no idea what inventions will be around in the future.

Will AI increase population?

• Will UBI be implemented? — If so then would UBI increase people having kids?

With billions of AGI humanoid workers… would building artifical islands be very cheap?

• If so then TONS more land will generated…

With billions of AGI humanoid workers… will more cities be built?

How about a robot run city in the North Pole … maybe inside a dome or something … who knows… its a very large equation to predict not only how AI/automation will affect population behavior/migration but also how will the technologies that AI produce affect such migration/population growth.

I think the comment above refers to limits that are in our heads, our desires (2nd questions by OP)

Right now, you can go get human surgeries that attempt to transition one gender to another.

Obviously the surgeries are not able to fix many things, and leave scars and all kinds of damage.

Demos of medical labs 3d printing human organs have existed for 15+ years, but a combination of bureaucratic inertia and just flat problems with the printed organs have prevented their use.

Presumably if AI is in charge of the organ production, and it's had an enormous amount of practice doing it and many scientific experiments to understand it fully, much better organs could be created, new skin, new structures, whole limbs, and so on.

This would probably be initially be used to help the elderly - since you can basically replace their bodies except the brain this way - but eventually there would be perfect gender reassignment surgery.

Presumably eventually with nanotechnology, surgical incisions might be far tighter and cleaner - right along the line of cells, cutting structures without damage, and more importantly, suturing might be exact, where all the nerves and individual fibers in each muscle are actually reattached correctly, using protein based glue similar to how the cells bond now, and a lot less pain and inflammation after the patient wakes up - maybe none.

All that pain and scarring and swelling is basically because current surgeons don't have any better tools, this is the best they can do. (medical science does know the reason for a lot of it but has failed to develop tools to prevent it)

There's a third option: brain in a safe and secure box in a vault somewhere, connected to bodies by remote control.

Sure, but there is quite a bit of momentum behind the UBI movement, so if mass unemployment via AI comes, it seems likely it is UBI we will get.

I'm fine with profit tax. But some of y'all are calling for a wealth tax or violent takeover. Which would just fuck shit up for everyone. As for the latter part. I disagree. By reinvesting in their business they will continue to grow faster and faster and the equipment and property they own all will continue counting to their wealth. While the typical person continues to not bother with increasing their income except for through work.

Explain the popularity of AFV and other violent entertainment? Or the countless atrocities in history and why it never been hard to find people happy to do it? Truth is everyone is bloodthirsty. That's why the powerful created religion to control people and create a semblance of stability.

Maybe video input, which is throttled because it takes too much compute.

Microsoft wants as many private people as possible, and if a feature takes too much compute, less people can use it:

>1. Program Requirements. You need a valid Microsoft account and your devices must meet the minimum system requirements (https://account.microsoft.com/rewards/). The Program is open to users who reside in the markets listed in the FAQ. Individuals can have no more than one Program account, even if an individual has multiple email addresses, and households are limited to six accounts. The Program is solely for your personal and noncommercial use.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/servicesagreement/