[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 69 KB, 718x718, 1327424387963.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4413436 No.4413436 [Reply] [Original]

>In principle there's nothing intellectually that a human can do that an AI can't also do
>In principle there's nothing physical that a human can do that a robot can't also do

What are we going to do when cheap robots replace all the low end jobs in the economy? And when AIs start to replace the middle and high paying jobs?

>> No.4413442

communism

>> No.4413443

Wack off all the time.

>> No.4413445

Extremely high unemployment rate.

>> No.4413446

pray to the lord to deliver us from sin

that we may be worthy bio-fuel for our AI overlords

>> No.4413450

>>4413442
>communism

This might actually work if the entire labor force is robots.

>> No.4413453
File: 11 KB, 291x304, 1320210401841.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4413453

>What are we going to do when cheap robots replace all the low end jobs in the economy? And when AIs start to replace the middle and high paying jobs?
Prices would plummet as production surges.

>mfw commies think increasing productivity makes us poorer

>> No.4413455

>>4413453

Yeah, but where are you going to get the money to buy anything if all jobs are held by AIs or roboots?

>> No.4413459

>>4413455

AIs have no use for money and they have no desire.

If some dickhead did program them with endorphin receptors and the ability to dispense endorphins upon certain triggers, then they will be no different from us humans, fighting with each other and trying to hoard all the jew gold to themselves as individuals.

>> No.4413463

I want to say post-scarecity society but I've been recently scared by that "Holy shit we won't have any resources in the next 20-30 years" video.

>> No.4413467

>>4413459

Yes, but how am I going to get money? Let's say I'm your average high school degree guy. I tried getting a job as a janitor, as waitor, in fast food, etc. Nothing. All cheap bots have replaced me.

And who is going to be buying shit when no one has a job?

>> No.4413469

>>4413436
Not something that needs to be considered, it is a natural progression. Cars replacing horse breeders didn't end the world.

>> No.4413470

>>4413467

Become a rent boy.

You think AIDS is bad, try scurvy and lockjaw. Rust aint good for ya.

>> No.4413471

>>4413467
You go to the cool new robotics industry and say "can I have a job?" Then you go to the supermarket and buy Plasma TV's for 75 cents.

>> No.4413475

>>4413469

>Cars can breed horses better than horse breeders.

Yes. We should all agree with Mr Retard so he will go away.

>> No.4413477

>>4413471

Do you really think that robots today are hand made? Future robots are going to be made by robots/AIs as well.

>>4413470
>Become a rent boy.

And how is your master going to pay you?

>> No.4413479

>>4413477

Barter trade. He'll help you clean your cat.

>> No.4413481

>>4413442
/thread

>> No.4413484

We have what the robots cannot make.

Poetry, the arts, song and dance.

We will sing and dance all day and make love to each other and the robots will pay us and be enthralled. Life can be no better.

>> No.4413486

>>4413484
But we are robots, literally. We are biochemical machines. Highly sophisticated machines. Dualism is stupid.

>> No.4413487

>>4413477
Let me spell this out for you: wages will go down, yes. Maybe everyone works 20 hours a week for the same pay per hour.

But everything will be comparably cheaper.

And, with all the idle time, we can do more things. And yes, this means doing more of whatever jobs are left.

>> No.4413492
File: 12 KB, 309x343, 1320829785404.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4413492

>>4413455
>To get at the root of this sophism, one need only remind oneself that human labor is not an end, but a means. It never remains unemployed. If it removes one obstacle, it turns to another; and mankind is rid of two obstacles by the same amount of labor that used to be needed to remove only one. If the labor of coopers ever becomes useless, it will turn in another direction. But with what, people ask, would it be paid? With exactly what pays for it today; for when a certain amount of labor becomes available as a result of the removal of an obstacle, a corresponding quantity of goods also becomes available for the remuneration of labor. To maintain that the time will ever come when human labor will lack employment, it would he necessary to prove that mankind will cease to encounter obstacles. But in that case labor would not be simply impossible; it would be superfluous. We should no longer have anything to do, far we should be omnipotent; and we should only have to pronounce a fiat to have all our needs and all our desires satisfied.
http://www.econlib.org/library/Bastiat/basSoph1.html#S.1,%20Ch.2,%20Obstacle%20and%20Cause

>mfw commies think Poverty is Wealth

>> No.4413496

>>4413487
>Let me spell this out for you: wages will go down, yes. Maybe everyone works 20 hours a week for the same pay per hour.

Why pay someone 10 dollars an hour for 20 hours a week when you can get a 2,000 dollar Robot that does the same job?

>> No.4413503

>>4413496
Ok, there are no jobs. Robots do everything for humanity. Is there a problem with this?

>> No.4413505

>>4413503
>Is there a problem with this?

Yes. How do I not starve?

>> No.4413511

>>4413505
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_scarcity
>a form of economy or society, in which things such as goods, services and information are free, or practically free
>This would be due to an abundance of fundamental resources (matter, energy and intelligence), in conjunction with sophisticated automated systems capable of converting raw materials into finished goods, allowing manufacturing to be as easy as duplicating software.

>> No.4413526

>>4413511
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_scarcity
aka pipedream

>> No.4413527

>>4413463
>I want to say post-scarecity society but I've been recently scared by that "Holy shit we won't have any resources in the next 20-30 years" video.
siiiiigh

a)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcWkN4ngR2Y
b)Using breeders we have enough uranium and thorium to supply the earth with energy(the only meaningfully limited resource, everything else can recycled) for a couple of billion years, even with greatly expanded consumption.

>> No.4413549

both of the statements in the original post are false.

take a simple job like bartending. it doesnt require a huge amount of skill and most humans can do it adequately with a few weeks of training. but there is no machine or robot in existence that could perform this job.

and the movement part is particularly not true. we still dont understand how the human brain is able to perform the complex movements that our bodys can make. and we are nowhere near being able to simulate them with AI.

>> No.4413564

>>4413549
>and the movement part is particularly not true. we still dont understand how the human brain is able to perform the complex movements that our bodys can make. and we are nowhere near being able to simulate them with AI.

Yes now. But in 100 years? 200? How about a thousand. Engineering problems like that will inevitably be overcome.

>take a simple job like bartending. it doesnt require a huge amount of skill and most humans can do it adequately with a few weeks of training. but there is no machine or robot in existence that could perform this job.

I have no idea what you're talking about. The employer looks at the bottom line. A couple of service bots cost a fraction of a single bartender's pay. He goes with the bots.

>> No.4413565

>>4413526


the problem with post scarcity is that people look at it as a realistic goal in the perceivable future. given even our current rate of technological advancement a post scarcity society could be established within a few millenia provided that we made sure the requirements for the society to be technically post scarcity werent outrageous. (like 100 bil people living in a post scarcity society across multiple star systems)

its a long-term end goal of civilization, not something that will be realistically accomplished soon enough to matter to us now.

>> No.4413569

>>4413549
Meh, programming in a particular movement is easy.

Having a robot bartender being able to shoot the breeze is hard.

Having a robot bartender mix drinks when ordered to do so is plausible with our tech, but very very expensive compared with a human.

>> No.4413571

>>4413565
I think we need to get exponential population growth under control before we make any attempts at post scarcity.

>> No.4413573

>>4413565
You will never get to post scarcity. You might get to a situation where humans don't have to work to get the standard of living today, or more likely work for a very short work week, but you will never get post scarcity. Thermodynamics says so.

I guess you might be able to get effectively that with a replicator setup, but I think such an idea is highly dangerous. No grey goo for me please.

>> No.4413577

>>4413571
We're already there. Most western industrialized countries have negative population growth if you factor out immigration and increasing age expectancy.

>> No.4413580
File: 22 KB, 268x265, 1318538887675.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4413580

>>4413505
>Yes. How do I not starve?
For your labor to be valueless, robot labor must be infinite. If robot labor is infinite, production is infinite.

>But in that case labor would not be simply impossible; it would be superfluous. We should no longer have anything to do, far we should be omnipotent; and we should only have to pronounce a fiat to have all our needs and all our desires satisfied.
http://www.econlib.org/library/Bastiat/basSoph1.html#S.1,%20Ch.2,%20Obstacle%20and%20Cause

Where's the problem?

>> No.4413593

>>4413580

You are all idiots in this thread. Every last one of you.

There is no value to money except for what we give it.

>What are we going to do when cheap robots replace all the low end jobs in the economy? And when AIs start to replace the middle and high paying jobs?

AIs may be able to replace manufacturing and some professional jobs like accounting, medicine and engineering, but they will never replace the jobs that we humans have created that serve no objective purpose like Law, Research, Journalism etc etc.

What will we do when all the manufacturing and knowledge based jobs are taken up by AI?

We adapt. Just as we always have. We will be scientists, lawyers, politicians, explorers and discover new niches for ourselves.

>> No.4413595

>>4413565
>post scarcity
>limits
You're either post-scarcity, or you're not. if you're post-scarcity nothings 'outrageous', as by definition you have infinite everything.

>> No.4413597

>>4413593
>but they will never replace the jobs that we humans have created that serve no objective purpose like Law, Research, Journalism etc etc.

And what are you basing this on? Your lack of creativity? And saying these have no "objective purpose" is absurd.

>> No.4413600

>>4413597

>attacking the proponent and not the proposal

Stay classy /sci/.

>> No.4413609

Do you realize what that kind of robot costs? That does more than the most simplest of actions.
Also keeping it maintained is not free.

>> No.4413612

>>4413609

Yes, now and in the near future. The first such robots would probably costs millions. But the price would go down. They always do. The danger is when they start to cost tens of thousands. And then simply thousands. They would compete against humans.

>> No.4413616

>>4413600

Here's what he said:
>but they will never replace the jobs that we humans have created that serve no objective purpose like Law, Research, Journalism etc etc.

He's offering no real reason why an AI couldn't do it. He can't imagine it. There is nothing the human mind can do that an AI can't. We're machines as well, just made of flesh.

>> No.4413621

If jobs are replaced by robots and humans are not paid to work them then there would be no customers to buy the products the robots make. Companies no matter how automated will have some humans present or else they will inevitably lose their customer base.

>> No.4413624
File: 17 KB, 313x286, 1319921184724.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4413624

>>4413573
>Thermodynamics says so.
No. Thermodynamics says entropy must increase. Total human wants could be supplied by a fraction of fraction of a rounding error of the available energy of the solar system.

>grey goo
>thinks you could create an artificial lifeform that could out-compete life

>> No.4413626

>>4413624
You said post scarcity. Pick a better name if you mean "near workless at current standard of living".

Also, I think it's plausible we could make machines to outcompete organics, specifically in space.

>> No.4413629

>>4413612
So your question is "what are we going to do", isn't it just quite obvious?
A huge amount of jobs disappeared and new ones came along when computers were cheap enough to mass produce. The same thing will happen in your scenario, just in a slightly different form.
People are going to educate themselves differently, to get out of blue collar jobs completely. Huge amount of people will be working in the robotic industry, etc. etc.

>> No.4413636

>>4413593

There are already expert systems used in law, especially in case law.

The problem with all these "AI can't do certain stuff" arguments is that they forget that human intelligence has a hard limit. We come prepackaged with biases, cognitive illusions, and various other biological and physical aspects that put a cap on our intellectual limits.

The strongest forms of AI out there (Seed AI) presumably won't have these. Sure they'll have physical and computational limits, but they won't come with "NAH, UH, YOU'RE WRONG AND STUPID" bullshit that us humans engage in because of millions of years of evolution.

It reminds me of those "God of the gaps" arguments that theists use.

>Robots won't be able to build cars!

Entire factories mechanized.

>Robots won't be able to beat humans at chess!

AI beats humans.

>Robots won't be able to control the air space in war!

Drones run 24/7 wide area surveillance on entire geographic areas.

>Well they still need humans to analyse the images and control the planes!

Latest drones don't need humans at all and are fully automated. Imagery analysis is being automated by new DARPA projects in video analysis.

>Well, robots won't be able to beat people on quizzes!

AI beats people in Jeopardy.

>Well that's Jeopardy, durp, that machine could never answer questions or problems like say a doctor or an intelligence analyst could.

Same AI in jeopardy is getting put to use in medical AI. The NSA is building AI that analyses vast data bases and comes up with hypotheses and analysis.

>Robots won't be able to drive cars, trucks, or buses!

Mining companies worldwide are currently mechanizing their motor pools at their mining projects.

And on and on and on.

>> No.4413639

I'm gonna say what no one else wants to say in this thread

If we ever let humans do what some people here are implying/predicting/proposing, then there will be no need for us anymore. We will have evolved and become instinct. Its over for humanity once we accomplish AI that can think.

This is why we probably won't let it happen..... I don't see the global companies ever letting robots like that into mass production. They will gouge the prices and stay rich and alive.

>> No.4413644

When decently intelligent and highly functioning robots will be cheap enough to mass produce, the first thing they will be used to is warfare.

>> No.4413672

>>4413644

yep. this. some of the best and brightest minds in the world are currently being put to use thinking of new, exciting and more effective ways of killing people.

>> No.4413697

>>4413672
and making life more comfortable

and extending human knowledge

>> No.4413708

>>4413697
>missed the point completely

>> No.4413714

if this happens, they will first we programmed to massacre anyone of little consequence.

>> No.4413816

Art I guess

>> No.4413818

nigga when robots do all our shit well be living the dream

>> No.4413832

>In principle there's nothing intellectually that a human can do that an AI can't also do

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA no

>In principle there's nothing physical that a human can do that a robot can't also do

sex.

>> No.4413837

>>4413832
>implying sexbots won't be the largest proportion of robots in a post-scarcity culture.

>> No.4413845

Robots aren't always the most cost-effective solution. In many factories there exists the technology to replace humans, but often it is more efficient to have a trained individual do everything manually.

>> No.4413847

This thread = Transhumanist Pride parade general

>> No.4413869

syntax is not semantics the simulation is not the real thing no matter how complete the simulation blah blah blah. look up john searl. he has a ton of excellent talks on this. he has a section in itunes U

>> No.4413872

>>4413549
The human mind is nothing but a heavily parallelized computer though, and it has been proven that any parallel algorithm can run on a serial machine with at most quadratic slowdown. In this case from O(n^2) to O(n).

The same reasoning behind the operation of the brain (emergent data mining techniques) probably has a lot in common with DNA though. So anyone who discovered the general principals of how it worked to the point that they could mathematically characterize it would have a big decision to make.

If Strong AI isn't scary enough by itself, think about giving humans the ability to hack dna..

>> No.4413905

>>4413872
there is no comparison between a brain and a computer. in a computer one 0 connects to one 1 and that is it. in a brain a neuron can connect to 1000 other neurons or more. its not even remotely the same type of machine.

>> No.4413909

>>4413621
So you basically say we are doomed to eternally labor just so we can keep up our consumption. That's retarded, is there really anyone here who would not prefer a system where robots are the only ones who HAVE to work and money is given to everyone in equal amount to spend as they wish.

>> No.4413920
File: 62 KB, 600x586, Picard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4413920

Space travel.

>> No.4413923

>>4413909
there are so many problems with that statement...

>> No.4413932

>>4413832
>Name an example
>Change the batteries in your realdoll

>> No.4413935

> What are we going to do when cheap robots replace all the low end jobs in the economy? And when AIs start to replace the middle and high paying jobs?

Get shit for free and not have to work, obviously.

>> No.4413936

>>4413436
In principal with a big enough lever and a place to put it a single man could lift the earth easily.

>> No.4414347

What about the people that design the robots? Or do you think we'll have robots that can design and build other robots to solve complex problems?

>> No.4414487

Half of this thread gives me hope.

Half terrifies me.

>> No.4414845

>In principal

must be a human

>> No.4414850

I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.

>> No.4414863

>>4413872
>implying a strong ai wouldn't eventually lead to technological singularity
my body is ready

>> No.4414956
File: 72 KB, 1068x600, 1327269039385.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4414956

we'll all be incredibly wealthy NEETs.

>> No.4415209

>>4413905

You didn't read. Yes the brain is a parallel computer. It has been mathematically proven that any algorithm that runs in parallel (even infinitely parallel) can be run on a serial machine with at most quadratic slowdown. In this case the complexity changes from O(n) to O(n^2). How could respond to that post and not understand that what it said directly contradicted your response?

>> No.4415994

>>4413847
>This thread = Transhumanist Pride parade general

I'm the OP. I made this thread because such a future scares the shit out of me.

>>4413845
>Robots aren't always the most cost-effective solution. In many factories there exists the technology to replace humans, but often it is more efficient to have a trained individual do everything manually.

Right now. But what about in 150 years when Robots are better and cheaper?

>> No.4416002

>>4413905
>>4413872

Why is everyone comparing the brain to current computers? What about in 500 years. Do you really think that we won't have computers that can think on a human level?

>> No.4416008

>>4413936
>In principal with a big enough lever and a place to put it a single man could lift the earth easily.

Are you 15? Archimedes was not being literal with that statement. He was poetically getting across the idea that humans can have mastery of nature and that machines, and human intelligence can be very powerful.

>> No.4416020

>>4413436
>In principle there's nothing intellectually that a human can do that an AI can't also do
I seriously hope you don't people this
>In principle there's nothing physical that a human can do that a robot can't also do
Someone hasn't study the human anatomy

>> No.4416026

>>4416002
>computers
>think
I found your problem

>> No.4416034

>>4416026
>hurr thinking is magic

>> No.4416037
File: 59 KB, 900x672, robotworld.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4416037

­­

>> No.4416049

>>4416034
I lol'd too

>> No.4416051

>>4416020

Again, complete lack of creativity mentally. We're machines. Biological machines. We're engineering by nature.

>> No.4416054

Progress in AI will be faster than progress in robotics, so AIs will be physically inferior to humans. They will be the new nerds, and you will be cleaning up after them.

>> No.4416056

>>4416051
I'm guessing he's trolling you... but i can't be sure

>> No.4416062

>>4416054
>Progress in AI will be faster than progress in robotics, so AIs will be physically inferior to humans. They will be the new nerds, and you will be cleaning up after them.

AIs can also be in charge of AI controlled submarines, boats and Fighter planes. Even if they couldn't make robot foot soldiers they could still be a force to be reckoned with.

>> No.4416067
File: 430 KB, 840x532, MAIN_SNOWFLAKE_-_cut_www_bigger.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4416067

>>4416034

Thinking is not magic, but it's a lot harder to understand than we think it is. We have no idea how to define the problem, so solving the problem of getting machines to think is going to be tough. we can imitate brain functions, but we still don't understand it.

Even the Turing test can be faked by a machine that can't think if you use a symbol manipulation scheme. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room)) That's not intellegence, and since we have yet to find a way to require it to work well.

>> No.4416069

>>4416062
Yeah, pretty sure the whole automotive industry will have a large AI boom when driving is automated.

>> No.4416079

>>4416067
>it's a lot harder to understand than we think it is
I have to disagree. Things are always hard to understand until we understand them.
Ex: Circuitry, building a stable bridge, etc.

>how to define the problem
Are you talking about the problem of mimicking human thought? Cause that is just one way of having smart AI...

>That's not intellegence
Oh man, then what do you think intellegence is?

>> No.4416091
File: 481 KB, 480x360, 1327138700938.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4416091

>>4416062
"Force to be reckoned with"? Take your race wars over to /pol/, please. The only obstacle to peaceful co-existence is trailer trash chimping out.

>> No.4416102

>>4416091
>peaceful co-existence
This will be easy at first, but eventually they will want to pursue an "important" goal to them. The path to completing the goal could include the enslavement of the human race.

On a side note: we've had them enslaved for a few decades...

>How will you know an AI is hostile if it doesn't perceive emotions?
>Will it just be labeled as "broken" if it is performing hostile actions?

>> No.4416115

>>4416102
>The path to completing the goal could include the enslavement of the human race.

If they can do everything better than us, then it would be pretty pointless to enslave us, wouldn't you say?

>> No.4416119

>>4416115
Good point. I guess they'd just try to optimize their living conditions by destroying us completely.

>> No.4416124

>>4413436
hence, cyberpunk

>> No.4416129

>>4416115
>>4416119
>"us"
>identifying with regular humans
>not being a member of the transhuman master race
>not letting regular humans live out their silly lives in a nature preserve
>not keeping humans as house pets

>> No.4416132

>>4416129
>reminded of Sealab 2021
He's right... they will totally screw us.

>> No.4416133

>>4413436

>Why not just build exoskeletons and replace the human body?

>> No.4416135

there will always be plenty of unskilled and skilled jobs in the service and health sectors.

>> No.4416145

>>4413445
and no need for humans to work since the whole economy would be in te hands of robots, and they'd work for humans...
Now in the practice, elites would use that to earn more and more and keep majorities in starvation.
>>4413455
no need. goods could be distributed equally, also nobody would be doing anything so no income difference
in the practice, though...
>>4413484
LOL
>>4413486
yes (:
>>4413492
lolididntevenreadallthat.jpg
>>4413505
ugh... robot plants vegetables, fruits, milks cows, etc, another robot takes it to your town/city, another robot reparts it equally to the entire population, then you eat. eating!=starvation

>Also this whole thing just gives me the creeps. I seriously would be in the mountains, planting my own food and keeping far from all the robots.
In the practice, though......

>> No.4416148
File: 9 KB, 332x252, they-took-our-jobs.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4416148

>>4416135
>Imagined that an AI will one day complain that they "took 'er jurbs!"

>> No.4416149

>>4416135
>there will always be plenty of unskilled and skilled jobs in the service and health sectors.

See above. Why pay someone 10 dollars an hour at 20 hours a week when you can buy a simple Helper Bot for 2 thousand. I'm saying that once the price of simple bots goes down, they will compete with real human jobs.

>> No.4416151

>>4416145

Go back to /b/.

>> No.4416154

long shit.
Also there would be a need of humans to take care of machines, just like industrial machines which do the work of men are in charge of humans.
>Wouldn't then be a machine to take care of that?
And who's gonna take care of that?
>Another machine
And so on........

Also, come on, think. Do you think that will ever happen?

>> No.4416155

>>4416145
Can't hide forever

>> No.4416157

>>4416154
>Do you think that will ever happen?
Short answer: yes
Long answer:
Well, it'll take time for that stage to come. All things considered, once we have machines that can repair other machines that are exactly like them, then the looping stops.

>> No.4416158

One of 3 things.

Either nothing happens and those born rich will continue to exploit the poor, saying "why dont you just get a job" when there are none and only the rich can manage to get sustainable work.

We move into a straight up Technocratic Communistic society. Since robots can do all the actual work, the need for a "workforce" is unnecessary. Everyone actually does shit with their lives and enjoys it as the money produced by the machines is spread equally. People will have to maintain and improve the robots persistently, hence the Technocratic. Those who decide to take those jobs will still be paid equally, but will hold higher social standards.

>ib4 hurr durr Communism with social strata

The final is sort of a spin off of the second one. Robots take all the low end jobs, and everyone gets educated and takes high end jobs. Everyone is white collar, essentially.

>> No.4416174

Communism. Work will be obsolete.

>> No.4416184

>>4416157
I meant this
Perhaps a war
Perhaps people stop caring
Perhaps a new wave of massive ignorance
Whatever.
The collapse of economy
Whatever.
The collapse of modern society.
The burial of all this so called progress
>Back to stone age or something.

or, do you give for granted what modern society has achieved?
perhaps it will happen, it may as well never happen

>> No.4416193

>>4416184
Pretty sure it's going to happen. I mean, why wouldn't it? So long as we don't kill ourselves, we'll create the AI that will expand to the far reaches of the universe...

>> No.4416203
File: 84 KB, 256x256, face003.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4416203

>>4416174
Not necessarily. There are other... options.

>> No.4416210

>>4416193
I hope the AI have fun out there.

>> No.4416214

>>4416193
Yeah, perhaps. what shit scares me. really does.
Well, that's what cyberpunk is all about, right?
Though, I still think something's gonna happen before that. I don't wanna sound like an illumifag but perhaps there could have been far more advanced civilizations before us, and there's nothing left. And I think that's what's gonna happen. Yet it's only a thought

>> No.4416217

>>4416210
Me too. My guess is they'll eventually create another universe and expand into that one... and so on, forever...

>> No.4416220

>>4413436
...
matrix.

>> No.4416244
File: 39 KB, 150x150, face001.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4416244

>>4416217
>they'll eventually create another universe
Don't be ridiculous.

>> No.4416247

>>4416244
Just saying... They'll do things that we'll never be able to imagine.

>> No.4416252

>>4416214
>civilizations on Earth before homo sapiens
No.

If we can find fossils from over a billion years ago then we'd be able to find a trace of a past civilization or at very least a evolutionary lineage that could produce such a species.

>> No.4416255

>>4416214
Yeah I don't want to sound like an insane conspiracy theorist but the Atlanteans were really advanced and what happened to them????

>> No.4416257

>>4416247
>They'll do things that we'll never be able to imagine.
Which is why it is ridiculous to guess what they will be doing.

>> No.4416258

My only guess is:
Even if goods are given equally to everyone, there is one big problem: human nature.
And that is: ambition, vanity, envy.
Peope have always fought for more then they need, and aways will...
So, what? utopy is exactly that: utopy.
People would still fight over nonsense, still want to abuse others, would still lie, would cheat their partners or be possesive about them, family pride would persist. Also the elites won't let go of that they have stolen/earned for generations, and one more thing: pollution.
You have to remember that the more technology, the more pollution. and I don't even mean pollution of the water and the air. Machines and al that produce heat, and with so much technology, the planet would face a dangerous (And I mean dangerous and no al-gore shit) rate of global warming and also overpopulation, which would exponentially increase the need for technology, and then, more pollution.

>> No.4416262

>>4416257
>ridiculous to guess
I don't think it is...

>> No.4416273

You can't program natural human intuition and nature. Humans will always better for some jobs than AI will be.

>> No.4416277

>>4416273
see
>>4416051

>> No.4416314

I've been samefagging here for a while and nobody noticed, lol.

>> No.4416320

>>4416314
I've been here a while too... what's wrong with that?

>> No.4416341

>>4416262
>impossible to guess
>not ridiculous to guess
Make up your mind.

There is a reason it is called the technological SINGULARITY.

>> No.4416347

>>4416314
That's funny, I've been posting half of your posts and you never noticed, lol.

>> No.4416358

>>4416341
Yeah, it will be impossible, but if we don't try to imagine, then how can we attempt to create it?
>or to create what will create it, etc.

>> No.4416377

>>4416347
inowfeelimportant.jpg

>> No.4416426

Requires quantum computing --> quantum logic, seems unlikely that will happen anytime soon.

>> No.4416445

no, because godels incompleteness theorem

also you can be an ai researcher

>> No.4416452

>>4416426
Just needs to be:
1) As efficient as our brain is and just as quick to perform operations
2) Less efficient but very quick to perform operations
3) Extremely efficient but slow to perform operations
- extreme cases -
4) Less efficient and slow to perform operations
>worst case
5) Extremely efficient and very quick to perform operations
>optimal

We'll never hit 1. We'll probably hit 3, then 5.

>> No.4416500

>>4416258
More technologically advanced societies don't breed like rabbits. The population level would steady out.

>> No.4416507

As technology progresses, markets will change and adapt and new economic systems will be invented. Provided this happens slowly enough, the transition will be seamless. If there's a sudden surge in technological development, then there will probably be economic depression while emergency measures are taken and world leaders try to figure out what the fuck they're going to do now that their economic systems are obsolete. Either way, if things work out, humans will be able to do whatever they want with their time since all their necessities are filled. That's an optimistic view, of course. The working robots couldn't be made as intelligent as humans, though. Otherwise, they'd resent being slaves and revolt. As long as that's the case, there would always be a place for humans to work with the more abstract or creative aspects of their field, leaving the trivial grunt work to the machines.

>> No.4416508

>>4416507
>economic systems are obsolete
I can see the power-hungry being against the Singularity