You said it's not a good idea. There's no projection going on here. When people say that's not a good idea, they're advising against it. Just have the intellectual integrity to own what you said. 🙄

You're straight up backtracking. You said it was a bad idea. That's advice, stop mincing words.

>Stop getting triggered by everything you see and be more pragmatic.

I don't get triggered by everything I see, only foolish things. Claiming that investing is a bad idea because money will soon be obsolete is advice, and it's foolish advice.

You can't plan for the singularity, if it occurs. It's a singularity.

You're advising someone against living within their means and investing because "money may not retain it's value in a post singularity world." Do you realise how cult-like and irresponsible that advice is? I have to say I'm really starting to dislike this sub more and more.

Yeah I feel like all billionaires are being painted with a broad brush here. Some Saudi prince who inherits billions with few responsibilities might be indolent, capricious and hedonistic but these captain of industry types? They live and thrive in high stress ultra-competitive situations their entire careers.

Billionaires aren't often dysfunctional. They're usually very high functioning. We just notice the ones who aren't because they're famous, and when famous people are dysfunctional the media likes to focus on them.

>But imo if you have an inclination and you put in the hours you could almost certainly do it(at least at industry jobs).

Yet most artists have the inclination and put in the hours and don't succeed.

>Obviously there's a lot of luck involved

More than nearly any other profession I'd say, along with being an author.

No, I don't hate anyone. I'm just pointing out the facts. Most artists spend thousands of hours and are skilled enough to do it professionally, yet still fail.

>water is a luxury good

Nonsense. Water is one of the basic necessities of survival regardless of the environment. Get out of here with your esoteric relativistic obscurantistism. 🤦

According to Collins Dictionary:

"Luxury goods are things which are not necessary, but which give you pleasure or make your life more comfortable."

Let's not overthink it.

I don't think there are any professions that are going to be safe from AI, so I would say it's worth continuing to study what interests us and do what we enjoy. We'll all be in the same boat economically as AI obsoletes so many fields of human work. We're going to need UBI as a society.

As progress keeps galloping along, soon all these neigh sayers will be whinnying about AGI when it starts jockeying them for their careers. 🐴

Soon, through the use of this technology, AGI will be able to achieve man's ultimate dream of converting the entire cosmos into extremely tiny smiley faces. 😌

It's a tricky one, because some art is rare due to the artists being dead, etc. That means the market will value it's scarcity whether we like it or not. I agree though, the art world is absolutely filled with snobbery. Keep in mind I'm also talking about graphic design here, which I worked in for years. It can be a very economically unreliable profession to put it mildly.

The vast, vast majority of artists throughout history have never been able to make an income. So the complaining we are seeing now is just coming from a privileged few. Throughout history the most common experience of being an artist has always been that you livelihood essentially never existed in the first place. I'm not targeting this blog specifically, I'm just pushing back against the recent sentiment.

Yeah I agree but I'm just cynical about how much influence we can have over policy.

No you're not alone I'd say there's probably around thirty of you guys. I think you're wrong though, and we're going to need UBI.

Look, I think we can all agree that by the end of the year, roughly five days from now, the entire cosmos will have been converted into computronium. I don't think that's an unreasonable timeframe.

They don't. There is an extremely obnoxious and noisy minority, and a mostly silent majority.

What were they supposed to do though? It's not as though anyone was suggesting solutions, other than UBI, and regular people don't have any say about implementing that anyway.

Why would an AGI waste precious time and energy making paperclips? That would be crazy. Clearly the superior goal would be to convert the entire cosmos into molecular scale smiley faces.

>Is it not reasonable to posit that AGI doesn’t need consciousness though?

It's very reasonable. It's entirely possible that silicon consciousness is impossible to create. I don't see why subjective experience is necessary for AGI. I used to think it would be, but I changed my mind.

I think they mean actual talk therapy with an AI therapist.

We've been arguing about what is good for thousands of years, but we tend to have an intuition as to what isn't good. You know, things that cause humans to suffer and die. Those are things we probably want to steer any hypothetical future superintelligence away from, if we can. It's very unclear as to whether we can though. The alignment problem is potentially highly disturbing.

I love the almost paradoxical combination of optimism and cynicism in this sub.