Comment

Comment on Why We Need An Anti-AI Movement Too

Ok, I’ll explain again. We already have enough raw resources to get us into post scarcity (consider extra terrestrial sources like the moon as well). We don’t need to come up with radically new tech to make this possible. The reason why we don’t have post scarcity is because of poor management.

Ok, for HOW we would make that leap, greedy capitalists would replace as many humans as possible with AI to earn more profits. More humans would be unemployed. These humans can vote, and will vote even harder once they’re unemployed.

Also, economies of today work due to humans. No matter how evil you are, u still need humans to have SOME cash so that they can buy ur stuff. We will enter a very bad recession if UBI isn’t done with AI replacing humans left and right. Billionaires may not have foresight. But when their profits start reducing actively, they’re definitely going to want to remedy this.

Therefore, what I’m saying is that a political revolution would happen, which would be supported by an angry, unemployed population and an angry billionaire class unable to make money.

Once the revolution happens, AI would first make social services and research get close to post scarcity. The ability to research stuff would make AI make resource usage a lot more efficient. It would also use this ability to make new resource mining easier.

Here’s another way to describe this: AI would first replace tertiary jobs, then secondary jobs and then primary jobs. Thus, AI would first control and improve upon tertiary goods and services, followed by secondary and then primary. Expansion of all of these tiers leads us closer to post scarcity, thus achieving effective post scarcity in decades.

Remember, I’m not saying that AI will do this alone. I’m saying that the presence of AI would force humans to bring on a revolution, which would make AI central to all production. This would in turn lead to post scarcity.

source

Sort:hotnew top

RiikkaTheIcePrincess@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
I think I disliked your ideas less before I read any of it and just assumed you thought the thing that generates innumerable images of east asian women with huge tits and extra rows of teeth was gonna fly to Luna and harvest huge crops of taquitos for us to eat.

source
Jomega@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

We already have enough resources to get us into post scarcity

No. No we don’t. This is straight delusional levels of optimism on display here. The universe is entropic by nature. Things get used up. Barring some form of miracle tech we can’t even conceive of yet, it is not possible for us to have an infinite amount of anything.

However, not implementing UBI would be bad for the billionaire class.

That’s the thing though. They aren’t smart. We have seen time and time again that they would cut off their nose to spite their face. Why would this be any different?

source
- UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  
  No. No we don’t. This is straight delusional levels of optimism on display here. The universe is entropic by nature. Things get used up. Barring some form of miracle tech we can’t even conceive of yet, it is not possible for us to have an infinite amount of anything.
  
  Lol wat are you talking about? The amount of extractable resources on the moon itself are enough to sustain a thousand humanities. Efficient resource usage ensures close to 100% recycling. The only thing that gets “used up” is energy. I’m very confident that we’ll be generating energy by fusion within this century. And for fusion fuel, it is so so so so unimaginabely abundant! If a spaceship decided to go interstellar, it wouldn’t even need to carry its own fuel. The sheer amount of hydrogen in the interstellar medium itself is enough to provide a lot of fuel. It’s like a ship moving in an ocean of oil. Plus, I’m pretty sure that humanity wouldn’t increase in population much after space travel becomes a thing. I’m kinda tired right now, so I won’t elaborate on that. But in short, other sources of entertainment + an anti natalist culture + longer lifespans + deviation from the traditional monogamous two partner model would end up lessening the need for having kids.
  
  That’s the thing though. They aren’t smart. We have seen time and time again that they would cut off their nose to spite their face. Why would this be any different?
  
  But they ARE smart (kinda). Had they been stupid, we would have had socialist systems in place a loooong time ago. Don’t fool yourself by equating the bourgeoisie to Elon Musk. He’s just an egoistic idiot who was very lucky. The others however, are egoist and lucky, but not necessarily idiots. Take Rupert Murdoch for instance. The mf single handedly caused Brexit, and is responsible for progressive politics to be held back in the US for a looong time. Look at all the oil execs for instance. Why haven’t climate friendly policies taken hold? These ppl gaslighted entire populations into serving their own interests. The bourgeoisie are evil, sure. Doesn’t mean that they are stupid enough to act against their own interests.
  
  source
  - Jomega@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    
    Lol wat are you talking about? The amount of extractable resources on the moon itself are enough to sustain a thousand humanities
    
    Do you have any idea how much it costs to get to and from the goddamn moon?! There’s the reason we don’t exactly make a regular thing about it. The costs are astronomical, pun very much intended.
    
    The only thing that gets “used up” is energy
    
    I’m not exactly a physicist, but if you’ve suddenly solved the problem of entropy then you should contact one and claim your Nobel prize. I’ll wait.
    
    But in short, other sources of entertainment + an anti natalist culture + longer lifespans + deviation from the traditional monogamous two partner model would end up lessening the need for having kids.
    
    You’re making a lot of assumptions about how how society will develop.
    
    The bourgeoisie are evil, sure. Doesn’t mean that they are stupid enough to act against their own interests.
    
    m.youtube.com/watch?v=qppZQCReiDg
    
    source
    UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    
    Do you have any idea how much it costs to get to and from the goddamn moon?! There’s the reason we don’t exactly make a regular thing about it. The costs are astronomical, pun very much intended.
    
    No. The costs are astronomical to get TO the moon. Not from it. To get from the moon back to Earth, all you would need is a strong-ish magnetic ramp. The stuff that you would need to send to the moon would be nothing compared to the material that would be sent back.
    
    I’m not exactly a physicist, but if you’ve suddenly solved the problem of entropy then you should contact one and claim your Nobel prize. I’ll wait.
    
    Huh? Energy is the only concern that we have. You can manufacture, destroy and recycle aluminum soda cans forever (almost). You can’t do that with energy. Which is why we need to get energy from a low entropy source. We wouldn’t have this problem for billions of years, till the heat death gets us (assuming that that theory is real in the first place).
    
    You’re making a lot of assumptions about how how society will develop.
    
    I’m merely making projections based on trends in the last few decades. Antinatalism is and will be on the rise, unless religion comes back (which thankfully is unlikely). Medical science is advancing at unprecedented rates. Pair this with breakthroughs in other fields (AI for instance), and you get an ever accelerating series of breakthroughs. Based on this, I see no future where human population would be increasing much.
    
    m.youtube.com/watch?v=qppZQCReiDg
    
    Tell me why u don’t have socialised healthcare in the US yet. Tell me why you don’t have stricter tax laws that close loopholes for billionaires in the US yet. Tell me why unions have such a small footprint in the US. Again, as I said. Had the billionaires been stupid, there would’ve been socialism everywhere. However, they are smart enough to stay in power and ensure that their own interests are protected.
    
    source