6 ms·

Firstly, this generation of AI is not going to take away all jobs Secondly, we already know what happens when sectors face mass unemployment from the 1980s, wh

Firstly, this generation of AI is not going to take away all jobs Secondly, we already know what happens when sectors face mass unemployment from the 1980s, when steel and coal workers were laid off en-masse: nobody came to help Accelerationists want to see their jobs go up in smoke because they think that if enough white collar workers are impoverished, everyone who was formerly poorer than them, will chip in to rescue us Just like they didn't in 1985... In a context where the state already has less tax revenue due to mass unemployment! It's completely bananas thinking that only survives on internet brainrot forums

Marha01 2mo ago
> Firstly, AI is not going to take away all jobs Human-level AGI is by definition able to take away all human jobs. > Secondly, we already know what happens when sectors face mass unemployment from the 1980s, when steel and coal workers were laid off en-masse: nobody came to help There is a massive difference between 20-30% of people in a country being unemployed (historical sector-wide collapses), and 80-100% of people in a country being unemployed (human-level AGI unemployment). The second situation is completely historically unprecedented and will *not* lead to the same results. > In a context where the state already has less tax revenue due to mass unemployment! If human-level AGI is an actual reality, taxation (and money itself) is no longer relevant. Only energy and resources may still matter.
- watwut 2mo ago
  > 80-100% unemployed This would mean that there are no AI companies at all, because there is no one to buy their products. So, they have nowhere to get money for whatever they want to sell.
  - andrekandre 2mo ago
    its basically the end of capitalism... for better or worse...
    - watwut 2mo ago
      To compare, great depression had 25.6 unemployment rate. It helped the WWII to happen. It wont be the end of capitalism. But, it would mean major outbursts of violence and major civil war or revolution. Where AI companies will be (deservely) the hate targets. But my point really was that it is economic nonsense.
      - Marha01 2mo ago
        > Where AI companies will be (deservely) the hate targets. That depends on what those companies do in response. Giving away robot-produced stuff for free could quicky earn them praise, instead of hate. If human-level robots enable massive increases in efficiency and production, at least one of the companies will decide to mitigate any risks in this way.
        watwut 2mo ago
        You are severely underestimating how much free stuff would 349,163,268 of American citizens need to make a small difference. To achieve that, they would need to steal farms from current owners. And they will be hated, because they stripped people of future and bought in violent hellscape for literally everyone.
        Marha01 2mo ago
        > You are severely underestimating how much free stuff would 349,163,268 of American citizens need to make a small difference. You don't need to persuade all of them. > To achieve that, they would need to steal farms from current owners. Steal, or buy? And perhaps not. With robotic labor massively increasing economic efficiency, other forms of production could become viable, such as vertical farming.
  - vanuatu 2mo ago
    at human-level AGI there would be no need for people to 'buy' when the machines can just do
    - watwut 2mo ago
      If people dont buy, company does not have money nor income. Simple as that. There will be no need to use those machines, because you cant sell the output of those machines. So, you have starwing hopeless population not buying your products. Which means you cant produce. Which means, you eventually become part of that starwing population (or they kill you in some outburst).
      - Marha01 2mo ago
        You are still thinking in terms of monetary economics about a situation where money is no longer needed. In a monetary economy, if you need X, you need the money to buy it. In a post-AGI economy, if you need X, you ask your human-level robots to make it (including making more robots). No money involved at all.
        vrganj 2mo ago
        Money is just an abstraction for resources. You'll still need land, energy, minerals etc.
        Marha01 2mo ago
        Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land.
        vrganj 2mo ago
        > Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. On who's land? With who's energy? > They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land. Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete?
  - charlie90 2mo ago
    money is just an abstraction over value, it is not value itself. if AGI is achieved, the AI labs will just use AGI to produce what they need instead of trading for it, which would include full vertical integration on all products.
    - goatlover 2mo ago
      They will still need land, energy and resources. They will also be subject to the wrath of voters and angry unemployed mobs.
      - Marha01 2mo ago
        > They will still need land, energy and resources. Human-level robots can mine resources and build power plants. Perhaps you need some initial land to build your first robotic base, but robots can also perform work to earn you money to buy more land afterwards.
        goatlover 2mo ago
        Everyone is not just going to be able to tell their robots to buy land where the precious minerals are.
    - watwut 2mo ago
      No they wont, because producing requires more then just "intellingence". AGI itself produces nothing. Also, if there are no money so 80%-100% of people move to barter instead of money to trade stuff. Same thing, just less effective.
      - Marha01 2mo ago
        > No they wont, because producing requires more then just "intellingence". What more does it require? Spoiler: now you tell me what more is needed, and I would then tell you how to use intelligent robots to obtain it.
- addaon 2mo ago
  > Human-level AGI is by definition able to take away all human jobs. What definition is this? At best it would be able to take jobs that currently rely on human intelligence. There's a lot of ditch diggers, prostitutes, athletes, models, acrobats, painters, etc, etc out there who have nothing to fear from the first-order availability of disembodied intelligence. (There may be impacts from second-order and higher effects, but this is hard "by definition.")
  - Marha01 2mo ago
    > ditch diggers AGI-level robots can do this. > prostitutes, models, acrobats, painters, etc You have a point. Perhaps I should have said "overwhelming majority of human jobs", instead of "all human jobs".

Marha01 2mo ago

> Firstly, AI is not going to take away all jobs Human-level AGI is by definition able to take away all human jobs. > Secondly, we already know what happens when sectors face mass unemployment from the 1980s, when steel and coal workers were laid off en-masse: nobody came to help There is a massive difference between 20-30% of people in a country being unemployed (historical sector-wide collapses), and 80-100% of people in a country being unemployed (human-level AGI unemployment). The second situation is completely historically unprecedented and will *not* lead to the same results. > In a context where the state already has less tax revenue due to mass unemployment! If human-level AGI is an actual reality, taxation (and money itself) is no longer relevant. Only energy and resources may still matter.

watwut 2mo ago
> 80-100% unemployed This would mean that there are no AI companies at all, because there is no one to buy their products. So, they have nowhere to get money for whatever they want to sell.
- andrekandre 2mo ago
  its basically the end of capitalism... for better or worse...
  - watwut 2mo ago
    To compare, great depression had 25.6 unemployment rate. It helped the WWII to happen. It wont be the end of capitalism. But, it would mean major outbursts of violence and major civil war or revolution. Where AI companies will be (deservely) the hate targets. But my point really was that it is economic nonsense.
    - Marha01 2mo ago
      > Where AI companies will be (deservely) the hate targets. That depends on what those companies do in response. Giving away robot-produced stuff for free could quicky earn them praise, instead of hate. If human-level robots enable massive increases in efficiency and production, at least one of the companies will decide to mitigate any risks in this way.
      - watwut 2mo ago
        You are severely underestimating how much free stuff would 349,163,268 of American citizens need to make a small difference. To achieve that, they would need to steal farms from current owners. And they will be hated, because they stripped people of future and bought in violent hellscape for literally everyone.
        Marha01 2mo ago
        > You are severely underestimating how much free stuff would 349,163,268 of American citizens need to make a small difference. You don't need to persuade all of them. > To achieve that, they would need to steal farms from current owners. Steal, or buy? And perhaps not. With robotic labor massively increasing economic efficiency, other forms of production could become viable, such as vertical farming.
- vanuatu 2mo ago
  at human-level AGI there would be no need for people to 'buy' when the machines can just do
  - watwut 2mo ago
    If people dont buy, company does not have money nor income. Simple as that. There will be no need to use those machines, because you cant sell the output of those machines. So, you have starwing hopeless population not buying your products. Which means you cant produce. Which means, you eventually become part of that starwing population (or they kill you in some outburst).
    - Marha01 2mo ago
      You are still thinking in terms of monetary economics about a situation where money is no longer needed. In a monetary economy, if you need X, you need the money to buy it. In a post-AGI economy, if you need X, you ask your human-level robots to make it (including making more robots). No money involved at all.
      - vrganj 2mo ago
        Money is just an abstraction for resources. You'll still need land, energy, minerals etc.
        Marha01 2mo ago
        Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land.
        vrganj 2mo ago
        > Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. On who's land? With who's energy? > They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land. Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete?
- charlie90 2mo ago
  money is just an abstraction over value, it is not value itself. if AGI is achieved, the AI labs will just use AGI to produce what they need instead of trading for it, which would include full vertical integration on all products.
  - goatlover 2mo ago
    They will still need land, energy and resources. They will also be subject to the wrath of voters and angry unemployed mobs.
    - Marha01 2mo ago
      > They will still need land, energy and resources. Human-level robots can mine resources and build power plants. Perhaps you need some initial land to build your first robotic base, but robots can also perform work to earn you money to buy more land afterwards.
      - goatlover 2mo ago
        Everyone is not just going to be able to tell their robots to buy land where the precious minerals are.
  - watwut 2mo ago
    No they wont, because producing requires more then just "intellingence". AGI itself produces nothing. Also, if there are no money so 80%-100% of people move to barter instead of money to trade stuff. Same thing, just less effective.
    - Marha01 2mo ago
      > No they wont, because producing requires more then just "intellingence". What more does it require? Spoiler: now you tell me what more is needed, and I would then tell you how to use intelligent robots to obtain it.
addaon 2mo ago
> Human-level AGI is by definition able to take away all human jobs. What definition is this? At best it would be able to take jobs that currently rely on human intelligence. There's a lot of ditch diggers, prostitutes, athletes, models, acrobats, painters, etc, etc out there who have nothing to fear from the first-order availability of disembodied intelligence. (There may be impacts from second-order and higher effects, but this is hard "by definition.")
- Marha01 2mo ago
  > ditch diggers AGI-level robots can do this. > prostitutes, models, acrobats, painters, etc You have a point. Perhaps I should have said "overwhelming majority of human jobs", instead of "all human jobs".