Rogue_Moon_Boy t1_it1tt2a wrote on October 20, 2022 at 9:51 AM

Reply to comment by ouaisouais2_2 in Why do companies develop AI when they know the consequences could be disastrous? by ouaisouais2_2

>I have the impression that the ratio between the aristocratic 0.1%, the semi-comfortable middle-class of 9.9% and the 90% who are overexploited into misery has been the same since the dawn of civilization. We have simply been able to make more people.

You might want to look into how people lived 60/70/100 years ago. All the money in the world couldn't buy you the luxury even lower class people take for granted nowadays.

I know most of Reddit is all doom and gloom, because doom and gloom is what generates clicks. Reality is, we live in the best times ever for human beings if you look at the big picture. We are currently in a recession, this is temporary and not the end of the world.

>how can so many in this subreddit be so nauseatingly positive about high-technology?

Because it absolutely is a net positive looking at it objectively. Living conditions vastly improved basically everywhere. Poverty is at an all time low and falling, education levels shot up, medical treatments are better than ever which resulted in way longer life expectancy. We have the least amount of war ever in the history. Thanks to the internet literally everyone has a voice heard by thousands and millions, thanks to the internet education is basically free and you have access to all of human knowledge at your finger tips and in seconds.

Misery is just vastly overreported, because again, it generates more clicks.

Edit:

Nobody knows how the singularity will turn out, but according to history, better technology has always turned out positive for us humans in the big picture, even given short term drawbacks. Doom and gloom Terminator and Skynet stories are just Sci-Fi.

digitalthiccness t1_it20vrc wrote on October 20, 2022 at 11:19 AM

> We have the least amount of war ever in the history.

Sure, but now all it'd take is one nasty one and the uninhabited surface of the planet will be glowing for several million years. Having the sword of Damocles hanging over mankind's head 24/7 isn't nothing.

>better technology has always turned out positive for us humans in the big picture, even given short term drawbacks.

So far, sure, but the more powerful technology becomes, the greater the chance that the initial drawbacks are more than we can survive. Civilization survived the invention of nuclear weapons (...so far) through little more than blind, stupid luck. There's no reason to think that it's inevitable we will always survive great leaps in technological capability.

At this point I think we have no real choice but to push forward and try to progress while avoiding the dangers, but technological advancement is an existential threat and that threat should be respected.

ouaisouais2_2 OP t1_it1yfud wrote on October 20, 2022 at 10:51 AM

By "high-technology", I primarily meant AI. I admit that the term was a bit of a stretch.

I think however that you continue to underestimate the chaotic danger and uncertainty of the situation when it comes to AI.

Poverty, education and medical treatments are but rough estimates of well-being

>Misery is just vastly overreported, because again, it generates more clicks.

... as it should be, generally. Pain and anxiety are largely more important for human survival than pleasure and reassurance.

Rogue_Moon_Boy t1_it2nizm wrote on October 20, 2022 at 2:24 PM

>I think however that you continue to underestimate the chaotic danger and uncertainty of the situation when it comes to AI.

Pretty much every new technology ever in history was doomed as the end of the world initially.

>... as it should be, generally. Pain and anxiety are largely more important for human survival than pleasure and reassurance.

I disagree. It should be 50/50. A pipe dream for sure, but the current exaggeration of impending doom spread by social media and dinosaur media is just creating anxiety everywhere and a generation of doomers for no reason. It's not productive at all. Humans work best when inspired and hopeful, not if they are depressed and hopeless.

ouaisouais2_2 OP t1_it3615d wrote on October 20, 2022 at 4:26 PM

>Pretty much every new technology ever in history was doomed as the end of the world initially.

I doubt that people literally predicted the extinction of humanity or
dystopias in all the colors of the rainbow. Besides, all that shouldn't be a reason to not take serious predictions seriously.

We know there is a risk that is only possible with ASI/wide application of narrow AI. We know it can get unfathomably bad in numerous ways. We know it can only get unfathomably good in relatively few ways. It's highly uncertain how high the chances are that it lands on respectively bad or good.

It's only reasonable to be more patient to spend more time researching what risks we're accepting and how to lower them. I think that's the most reasonable at least on the extremely long-term