Ok? So should we just reinforce the status quo forever?

And yet, even though the US is so mighty and powerful, it still relies on europe for plenty. Good luck being on computers without us europeans that invented and still invent plenty of the underlying technologies.

Yes, we don’t have shiny tech monopolies, but those american companies rely on european fundamental technology, R&D and production (like the famous dutch chip machines that are shipped to taiwan).

Point is, nobody can do it alone. We all (democracies) should work together.

Yeah… because what we need is the US to be the AI tyrant of the world…

Cooperation (with friends) is better.

Ps: Also, LAION is european. This is an EU petition. So…

Well, it’s the EU that has the job of regulating it, not the Bulgarian government, so it kind of makes sense.

At the EU level, there’s the EU Artificial Intelligence Act being proposed. We’re the only ones actively doing shit about AI, just like with GDPR.

Why is that?

A capybara isn’t a rat though, is it? It’s that thingy that looks like a guinea pig but that is the size of a pig.

Wait, angels? Aren’t Americans protestant? Aren’t angels and saints a catholic thing?

Yes, I’m completely ignorant on this topic.

For sure not. Government could be overthrown and my property rights simply be nullified for sure. Who knows.

I am assuming those things won't happen.

I’ll not be homeless for sure because I have my fully paid off home. Other than that, I can’t guarantee I won’t starve if things go south.

Why are you talking in “future” humans? If the singularity happens, there’s no reason we won’t be those future humans thousands of years from now living those things.

Bing Create Image?

Well, you can use facebook, youtube, google calendar, etc. through safari/chrome/etc. on your phone too. Doesn't mean the experience isn't better when it is tailored to the platform you're using.

Having a lot of these platforms converted into chatGPT in the most ideal manner seems like a better way and more practical way to use it.

Well... Here they are: (GPT-4)

> Why did the woman carry a large roll of paper around with her? She wanted to always have the last word!

> Why did the girl bring a ruler to bed? She wanted to see if she could catch some Z's!

> Why do women love shoes so much? Because they've found that one pair can completely change their life, just like Cinderella!

Education is free in my country. I want to get a MSc to improve myself and learn more about the above topics, whilst getting job relevant skills - while they are still useful, at least.

Once I’m inevitably out of a job, I’ll still have the knowledge and achievement.

Tax the profit, not the bots

Except this is different. Humans have physical and mental capabilities. If AGI replaces the latter, then there’s no new mental job that is going to humans, no matter how many of them are created.

Physical jobs? Yeah, probably: Until robotics advances enough. I don’t want to be a robot repairer nor a store clerk though. I like my “mental” job.

Artificial General Intelligence

Look, those people are indeed Luddites. Is it unjustifiable? Of course not! Back in the 19th century, luddites also feared for their livelihoods and acted in a way to try to ensure their survival, even if the way they went about it might not have been the best one. It’s normal.

I don’t think being a ‘luddite’ is inherently wrong. It’s just human nature.

So.. I don’t really understand what is so wrong about those comments you’re mentioning. Our time will come too and many more luddites will come.

Let’s focus on creating those safety nets.

The most interesting thing is that the british spread these laws to all their colonies and then got rid of it, while plenty of countries still keep it, unfortunately.

Whilst I follow what you’re saying, what about induced demand here?

No wonder we launch so few rockets - they are freaking expensive.

If we could bring the costs down, more initiatives would follow.

Not building it because there’s not enough demand is like not building train tracks and trains because “nobody uses them” (no shit, they don’t exist).

I’m splitting hairs? That’s ironic for you to say. You’re the one pretending that resources are not financial resources at the foremost.

The transition will not happen as long as the added productivity is smaller than added costs or, keeping productivity similar, as long as the cost of adopting AI is greater than the cost of paying the salaries.

Are you really not getting what I’m talking about?

Human brains by themselves are not resources, but the salaries to pay for them are… fewer brains, fewer salaries, fewer resources…

You have to pay a salary to those brains, they're not free. If you don't need to pay them (because you use AI now), then you need fewer resources (as in money), ceteris paribus.

I'm not denying it might increase costs (as long as it increases productivity more), I'm simply pointing out that human brains are considered as resources - in business speak and economics at least, which is ultimately what matters.

By “resource” people normally mean money, not human brains. Less money needed to produce video games = less resources.

I’m sure they can still obliterate pedestrians on impact, don’t you worry.

Yes, but all those things (like we have in the EU) don’t invalidate the existence of billionaires because, once more, their wealth tends to be in assets, not cash.

They still exist, it’s just harder to get there. So you’re definitely not “taxing them out of existence “