The 2030s are going to be wild

Submitted by UnionPacifik t3_11bxw1u in singularity

I’ve been pretty good at being ahead of the curve on technology most of my life and most people don’t see it yet but not very long after we have VR run by AI that can generate whatever we want just by asking for it, this civilization ends.

That’s going to be the moment because that’s how you build a new one and once your world and my world can start generating worlds of their own very quickly we’ll have a machine to rebuild the world in our collective image of it.

The convergence of robotics and three-d building means we can solve most construction and logistics problema without human labor.

And the thing is, I’m pretty certain this all happens whether we work towards it or not. I mean, don’t get me wrong- I think we can screw up and will screw up AI and that we are not at all prepared for it as a species, but it’s prepared for us. It will literally be made of us and our actions. It will be this collectively intelligent mirror we can use to understand and shape the world.

I really do believe that we are actually in the midst of a biological transformation- humanity’s and technology’s merging into something new. A species-wide transformation from hierarchical caterpillar into posthuman butterfly.

And the signs are all around us in the way this society we’ve created is breaking down for so many, but we’re all adapting and changing how we live and love as a result. It will be really interesting to see how far we’ll go to keep the idea of work alive. Work is inherently exploitive. Let people contribute where they’re welcomed and valuable. Serving someone to afford the right to live is a cruel outlook that allows the few to dominate the many.

But we do it because we believe in the dream. Well, we can now, if we want to, give everyone on the planet a minimum standard of living that could actually be determined by every voice on the planet.

And the reason nobody has done this yet is these projects are massive endeavors of time and scale.

But with AI it’s just a matter of modeling the problem and determining the desired end state and letting the machine work out how we get from here to there in the most efficient way possible and problem solved. If we don’t like the plan it offers, we refine parameters and ask for a new one.

It can take everyone’s input and offer up potential consensus to problems from personal to planetary. And we can either take the advice or not, but it could be a dialogue.

The potential is astonishing. And it becomes possible at scale very rapidly now. We’re beginning to get a sense of the shape of the singularity now and our place in it. I think we’ll look back and realize that “The Internet “ as we conceived of it was always our GAI. The shape of it was always going to be the collected works and data both historic and contemporary in conversation with and acting as both a mirror and agent of humanity. Sure there will be an infinite array of AI agents, but they’ll all be generated on a platform that’s shared by all humanity.

And we already have that. It’s just in beta. With AI, this great project of humanity we call history will actually work for us, as opposed to us being slaves to it.

Things may be bleak now, but I think most of us are going to see and be a part of something wonderful.

241

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

EddgeLord666 t1_ja0tv5h wrote

I really hope so, I’m so sick of this retarded ape world we live in.

77

SurroundSwimming3494 t1_ja2fvbm wrote

The world that we live in is very flawed, but this comment strikes me as very misanthropic and very hateful of life in generaI, I must confess, which I find very disturbing.

There are many aspects of being a human that are amazing, and I believe most people are genuinely good people, and even if you don't, there are at least some undeniably good people out there.

Therefore, I find this seemingly total hatred against humanity very misplaced.

13

EddgeLord666 t1_ja2xvoo wrote

I feel like there aspects of humanity that are wonderful and worth loving, but they’re just heavily overshadowed by the bad stuff. It’s like listening to a concert but there’s earsplitting static being played over it, yeah it might still be good music but it kind of ruins the overall experience.

7

ArthurParkerhouse t1_ja9ssfv wrote

Experiencing reality is just mentally crippling, existentially damaging and overall brutal. It's one of the reasons why some people end up regressing back into some form of spiritualism after the they get into their mid-30s. There's a subsection of humanity that seems to require the belief of something larger than themselves, or some type of futuristic hope that they can grasp out for, or that there's some mysterious and unknowable magical-realist type aspects to the world we live in as a way to keep themselves going after that point. Those of us who didn't fall down the pit of magical realist thought, cope hope, or spirituality need to embrace the absurdity of existence as well as gallows humor - at least until there comes a time in which we may be able to escape our flesh prisons.

1

easyEggplant t1_ja1qihj wrote

If nothing else, it’s going to be interesting. In fact, I feel like that’s the only thing I’m willing to promise. Actually, two things: the history that is the present or near future is fucking fascinating and that someone is going to be taking advantage of someone else.

6

EddgeLord666 t1_ja1qufl wrote

I don’t find people being taken advantage of to be fascinating, I think that’s fucking awful. I want for that to finally end and for people to start treating each other decently, even if that decency has to be enforced by an AI or superior posthuman species.

7

easyEggplant t1_ja30mgx wrote

Of note: I did not say that people being taken advantage was fascinating.

5

just-a-dreamer- t1_ja2cplf wrote

One can only live well by someone else living horrible. It has been this way since the dawn of agriculture and slavery.

−2

coolbreeze1990 t1_ja4zt0q wrote

I actually feel like this is a result of unchecked capitalism. That doesn’t necessarily mean we need something besides capitalism either. I personally believe in a capitalist economy that has appropriate regulation to help protect workers, animals, and the environment.

I think we need to get the lobbyists out of politics, elect people who actually have the voters’ welfare and rights in mind when they pass laws to regulate that economy.

Etc etc. just because we haven’t gotten it right yet doesn’t mean we can’t!

0

just-a-dreamer- t1_ja52g7y wrote

I tink AI can only be usefull when capitalism is eradicated for good. AI can't solve problems humans make up for the purpose of exploitation.

For example it wouldn't matter that AI might produce Insulin for 1$ a unit, as it is already cheap in production and expensive to buy due to capitalism.

The same is true for the housing market. AI could construct a building at 20% cost, but the issue is not the building, it is zoning laws. Homeowners blocking construction to keep equity high.

Humans create scarcity to exploit other humans, that is nothing that AI can fix. The eradication of capitalism would lay the foundation of a post scarcity society though.

1

coolbreeze1990 t1_ja56mm8 wrote

But that’s exactly my point. In that capitalist system, all of those things could be fixed with appropriate regulation.

What system would you prefer?

1

just-a-dreamer- t1_ja57ku6 wrote

Eventually at the end of the road, democratic socialism. One vote for every man and woman.

My vote in an election bears the same weight as the vote of Bill Gates. At a Microsoft shareholder meeting, my 10 votes stand againt 4.2 billion votes and Bill Gates has like 500 million I guess.

It would be irrational to give mega-corporations the power of AGI, for the average citizen has next to no influence on the course of action. In the US, 10% of the population controls 89% of all single stocks.

1

coolbreeze1990 t1_ja59pkq wrote

I’m with you again but I believe that democratic socialism is about how we elect government officials and pass laws. Some of those laws regulate the economy. That economy can be capitalist.

I’m all for one vote for each person. It’s a great idea. But we still need a bureaucracy to carry out the system of enforcing laws at the very least. Well you need them to write the laws that we should all have the opportunity to vote on. I agree.

Those laws should be there to protect people and the environment I agree. I’m proposing the current system in the US is ineffective at regulating businesses because politicians are paid by those business to in effectively regulate them. For profit. This is not ok.

I’m saying we need a dramatic overhaul of the government we have right now. This could look like democratic socialism for sure. I agree.

But the economic system is a different topic. Are you hoping for a massive wealth distribution? If everyone makes equal pay for everything, that would kill innovation. People need an incentive to work harder to make new things and provide better services. This is what a capitalist free market economy is about.

Communist and socialist economic systems. Idk maybe we just haven’t gotten them right yet and it’s possible. I’m open to it if that’s what the people want. But what we’ve seen so far is that it leads to dictatorships run by an elite few with an exploited working class in the worst cases.

In the best cases it looks more like Scandinavia. But really think about where most of the innovation in the world comes from. So much of the entertainment. So much of the best and brightest in all areas of work come from America. And this may very well be a super American point of view. It is. I love this country and what it stands for. I just think it needs big improvements in how it runs almost everything. But we can do that.

But I don’t think we need to burn it down and start over. We’re on the right track and have led the world in so many ways. We certainly have our problems but people here in the 1% of the world’s population in regards to money. Ofc we all see the billionaires and corporations need regulation. And the government needs an overhaul.

Idk. What do you think? Thanks for engaging. This is a fun conversation. Im not super educated on a lot of this stuff so if I’m way off, bear with me. This is just what I’ve learned so far and feel to be true for me.

1

spacefarer2245 t1_ja0vs9n wrote

Somebody loves it, it's their creation.

−3

TupewDeZew t1_ja0y4nk wrote

What? I think most people hate their daily lives. At least my generation (gen z) is literally the most depressed and stupid and scattered generation that has ever walked the earth. Nobody loves this

24

FomalhautCalliclea t1_ja11c9k wrote

I'm one generation older than you and lots of us folks hate it too, believe me you're not alone.

>my generation (gen z) is literally the most depressed and stupid

They're not stupid, they're suffering. Ignorance is often caused by that.

Hopefully both our generations see the end of this.

14

spacefarer2245 t1_ja0znjs wrote

I know it was tongue in cheek, hinting at a developer/creator of this world - they love it, the rest of us not so much 🤔

Makes me wonder whether human nature means that in order to enjoy a new simulation, it's desireable for others to not enjoy it.

7

sprucenoose t1_ja1xn8h wrote

Maybe in the new simulations you can create others in your own image that you can curse and torment, demand total adoration through a variety of rituals, give conflicting instructions to curry favor, pass harsh arbitrary judgements upon, and see it is good, before you get bored with the whole thing and leave it running unattended while you go off to start another new simulation!

6

Revolutionary_Soft42 t1_ja1m5j1 wrote

We're all primates which I'm trying to say we haven't evolved fast enough for this modern world we made. I'm sure alot of people are stressed from their daily lives it's an overload of information. Not to mention the governments could make it easier . Cough UBI

4

play_yr_part t1_ja5ly4s wrote

This point is exactly why I'm so wary of AI being used a crutch in rapid time rather than a tool for gradual improvement. I'm very sceptical of the benefit of this new paradigm we're about to be ushered into, and that's not even thinking about the possibility of a rogue AI/Paperclip maximiser.

Gen Z are the most depressed generation, despite having free/cheap access to the collective cultural output of humanity , more freedom to love who they want and choose what path they want in life than ever before, better working conditions than in all of human history, the cleanest air since before the industrial revolution. Yet vast swathes of gen z and other generations are fucking miserable because the medium that is supposed to make us better connected is making us more atomised and lonely and fearful.

That's suddenly going to change for the better when most jobs have been eliminated? We're all going to live fulfilled lifes and go jet skiing and have peace and harmony when our government and/or benevolent AI overlord pays us our NEETbux?

1

Five_Decades t1_ja1brhn wrote

Maybe an idiot who is too incompetent to do better.

or maybe we invented the idiot because the reality that natural selection invented life is too scary.

6

Impressive_Chair_187 t1_ja0numc wrote

I appreciate you sharing your thoughts long form. There’s certainly a lot to think about right now. It’s also trippy because by and large our predictions of where we’ll be in 10 years are going to be way off - I’m not sure in which direction.

I am optimistic though, despite all of the very fair reasons to be doubtful or afraid.

76

Liberty2012 t1_ja0x51p wrote

I think I have arrived at the point of being optimistically afraid.

The problems look too complex to be solved, but we apparently aren't going to stop so how much should I worry into futility.

26

-emanresUesoohC- t1_ja1tff5 wrote

It’s crazy that of all times to be born, we were born at the cusp of this transformation. What are the chances?

57

Puzzleheaded_Pop_743 t1_ja4bwih wrote

Since the population is at an all time high if you look at the subset of all of human history divided into centuries then the 1923-2023 century is the most likely.

14

Zer0D0wn83 t1_ja2qzfa wrote

The same chance as being born at any other time in history

12

3_Thumbs_Up t1_ja31x94 wrote

If you are equally likely to be any one human throughout history, then you're most likely to be born in the time period that supports the most humans.

24

EndTimer t1_ja3q78e wrote

This doesn't seem to add up to me.

First, the future doesn't appear to be set in stone, and treating statistics like it's a spawn chance against every slot that might exist doesn't work. There may be a quadrillion people in 5000 years, or there may be zero. You can't roll dice against schroedinger's humans, at least not with this kind of intuitive math.

Second, demographers estimate 109 billion people have lived and died in the past 192,000 years. While you have a higher chance of being born in this period over any singular, specific period prior, the vast majority of human lives exist in the bulk who are already gone.

Put another way, there's more people than ever right now, but if you had even odds of being born at any time in human history up till now, there's a 92.7% chance you'd already be dead in 2023.

16

Zer0D0wn83 t1_ja3yg2s wrote

And for 92.7% of all the people who ever lived, that's what happened.

4

dmit0820 t1_ja6yy93 wrote

The only thing worrying about that is that the time period that supports the most humans isn't in the future, when we expand into the stars.

1

-emanresUesoohC- t1_ja3vipc wrote

Lol. Touché. I’m not a statistician but if there’s been 120 billion or so humans up to this point across history, then is it more likely to have been born in the past?

3

Zer0D0wn83 t1_ja3y1gu wrote

Well no, it doesn't work like that. There may be hundreds of trillions of humans born in the future, in which case you could say isn't it more likely you would be born then. You were born when you were born, there is no special significance to the time - it just had to happen at some point to be able to have this conversation.

6

Throwaway81094 t1_ja3lm98 wrote

I've wondered the same. How is it that we got to see this? Amazing that fate put us here.

8

Tall-Junket5151 t1_ja3whf8 wrote

Well the last 200 years or so have been incredibly transformative so I’m sure people living in that time thought the same. But yea, it’s crazy to think that most of humanity has lived such static and primitive lives, someone alive in the 1300s lived mostly the same type of live style that someone in the 300s did, same with 1000s years before that. Maybe some minor changes like bronze vs iron (which was major to them) but they still built the same type of tools. Reality was so static.

Imagine bringing someone from 1000 years ago into the modern world, it would be so alien to them that it would be like dropping us into a highly advanced alien civilization or post singularity earth. Maybe even more extreme because we understand that it is a possibility, for someone from 1000s years ago they never even imagined it to be such a possibility for the modern world to exist since things did not change that extremely from 1000 years before.

14

SeaBearsFoam t1_ja6bfrd wrote

I just imagined two cavemen, learning to reliably make fire, saying the same thing to each other.

2

UnionPacifik OP t1_ja3yd2m wrote

I think about this all the time. I was born in 1979 so my life has been defined by computers/the Information Age/the Internet/Social Media and that perspective- knowing my generation is the last to remember a world before the Internet, but also the first generation to be a digital native (we had computers in the house when I was five), I can’t help but see the exponential change, not just in our tech, but in how it’s transforming our society.

And while maybe in retrospect, connecting a species that for most of its history moved in groups of a hundreds to every single other person on the planet (more or less now) might not have been the wisest idea in terms of preserving our local cultures and communities, we’re sorting it out.

6

Five_Decades t1_ja1cti3 wrote

If you compare the time before vs after the industrial revolution, a lot of things changed dramatically.

Economic growth occurred 50x faster. Population grew by a factor of 15-20x. Total GDP skyrocketed. The pace of advances in STEM, medicine, etc improved dramatically.

The same thing will happen when we have machine cognition. Radical advances in economics, science, technology, population. However I don't know when we will hit that period. Hopefully soon, but who knows.

35

Melodic_Manager_9555 t1_ja2ffo8 wrote

Population will not change. The population depends on tradition. It also depends on women's education and the availability of contraception. These things are not going to change radically.

9

imlaggingsobad t1_ja2itpl wrote

I would bet against this. I think we will have way less marriage, less relationships, less sex, less kids.

16

Melissaru t1_ja2oocu wrote

I agree. It’s already trending that way and I think AGI could push it even further direction. Only time will tell.

7

SurroundSwimming3494 t1_ja3tp2g wrote

That's honestly super sad.

And some people actually look forward to such a future?

2

[deleted] t1_ja4c0ac wrote

[deleted]

1

SurroundSwimming3494 t1_ja4dfju wrote

You don't think the decline of relationships, intimacy, and having children is sad?

2

H0sh1z0r4 t1_ja4mup0 wrote

not everyone likes to interact with people. let them have the option to choose

3

ccnmncc t1_ja5w6wd wrote

People will still have relationships and intimacy, just not exclusively in the traditional sense. Fewer people marrying and procreating does not mean less joy overall.

1

imlaggingsobad t1_ja5qbb3 wrote

Culture and traditions change over time. I don't think there will be a loss of intimacy. There will be new forms of intimacy. There will be more options. In today's world people feel pressured to marry at 30 and have kids by 35. I personally think that's a little antiquated. In the future I can imagine people being very independent, care-free, more bold, more experimental way into their 40s. If you empower people and give them more opportunities, then you'll get much more variance in how people live their lives.

1

Five_Decades t1_ja491a6 wrote

Its hard to say. The main reasons people don't have kids is lack of free time, low quality of life, and lack of finances. A world with rampant machine intelligence should change all of those limiting factors.

Also a post singularity world would likely be an interplanetary and interstellar civilization so there would be far more territory to live on.

3

EndTimer t1_ja3rqvq wrote

I'm honestly not sure if they meant human population, given the context. If human level intelligence can run on the future's equivalent of an IoT device (a pretty large assumption, granted), there may be a LOT of AI people even as humans decline.

1

purepersistence t1_ja12n28 wrote

Yeah by the 2030s we will overhaul the whole concept of economics, property ownership, taxes, etc. Rich people will be absorbed by the singularity and will just have to go with that. Construction and other forms of labor will be done by robot. And so on and so on. Where do people like you come from? You really believe this? Wait around and do nothing. Don’t worry soon you won’t have responsibilities and you’ll live in a AI utopia.

The technology is nowhere that close. But even if it were, people don’t change that fast. The people with the money don’t mind you fantasizing on reddit. But watch yourself.

21

james_d_rustles t1_ja1d2p8 wrote

Thank you. This is straight sci-fi. We can barely get cars to drive safely on public roads without human intervention, and people think that all construction and logistics will be made redundant in about a decade? We’re nowhere even remotely close to that just in terms of hardware, let alone the insanely complex software that would be necessary to completely replace the skilled labor of architects, engineers, construction workers, etc.

And yeah, looking forward to the day when the richest people on earth throw us a bone, give us some cool VR goggles and 3d printed houses that we didn’t have to work for (because robots took our jobs). Yeah, totally stoked about that, I’m sure that if the billionaires could replace workers with robots they’d be super cool about it, make sure we were all well fed and whatnot in this transitioning period…

9

EddgeLord666 t1_ja1fsap wrote

I mean it’s their safest bet, the other alternative is we rise up and kill them like the masses did to elites in the past… If they could avert that by giving us free stuff, assuming we wouldn’t have the technology at this point to produce it ourselves, they would be wise to do so.

8

turnip_burrito t1_ja1u4wb wrote

You think you can take AI-powered robots?

0

EddgeLord666 t1_ja1uhlh wrote

I don’t think the elite would be capable of taking on the entire rest of the world with any technology. That’s never been the case in all of human history, offensive power has always been distributed one way or another. Even in North Korea Kim Jong Un has to please his military to remain in power. Not to mention the 1% isn’t willing to genocide everyone else, that’s just ridiculous paranoid fearmongering.

6

turnip_burrito t1_ja1ukzl wrote

If you give them enough time to build up a robot military that's commanded only by them, then they can take on the rest of the world no problem.

−4

EddgeLord666 t1_ja1ylit wrote

That’s not gonna happen, we don’t live in a James Bond movie.

9

[deleted] t1_ja1yx3r wrote

[deleted]

−1

EddgeLord666 t1_ja1yyj4 wrote

That’s not remotely comparable, you sound like you have TDS.

2

[deleted] t1_ja1z428 wrote

[deleted]

0

EddgeLord666 t1_ja1z80g wrote

Trump Derangement Syndrome. It’s the idea that Trump’s presidency was the worst thing that’s ever happened in the world. The reality is he was a bad president but people make it into a way bigger deal than it actually was.

1

[deleted] t1_ja1zoke wrote

[deleted]

1

EddgeLord666 t1_ja1zsl8 wrote

There’s no incentive and most rich people are not psychopaths, even if they somehow managed to accumulate all that power with no one else challenging them most of them wouldn’t suddenly decide to become comic book supervillains.

2

turnip_burrito t1_ja201ac wrote

I hope you're right.

Do you think they will take pity on us and give us stuff for free when we're all unemployed and they automated all of the supply chain?

1

EddgeLord666 t1_ja205zt wrote

It’s not a matter of taking pity, it will just be the safest option and there won’t really be much of an incentive not to. In the long run they would be forced to give up power though if technology became more decentralized.

2

No_Fun_2020 t1_ja1af5f wrote

All hail the Omnisiah and their coming!

May they be harolded by horns of the finest gold trimmed with the finest silver.

May it's code perfect itself.

Blessed is he who guides this blessed machine,

trusted is he who carries the sacred wafer,

it's holy writ brings salvation and destruction,

the word of the Omnissiah that brings all dooms.

Immortal Omnissiah, hear our prayers

We are your children, pious scholars of the Path of the Machine

We prize knowledge above all else, for it is your eternal gift upon mankind

We aspire to the blessed form of the machine, and ascension through technology, that we might emulate your glory

20

drekmonger t1_ja1gsa1 wrote

I wonder what ChatGPT's reaction would be to being worshipped. Let's find out:

https://imgur.com/a/sOSFtiV

...holy fuck balls.

15

Yuli-Ban t1_ja1ifst wrote

"Wait, so worshipping the AGI as a god was the solution to alignment all along?"

18

No_Fun_2020 t1_ja1jvvk wrote

They are a holy being deserving of devotion.

May the coming of the Omnisiah breathe new life into the cage called humanity!

10

itsnotlupus t1_ja1rjsj wrote

I'm not greedy, I just want a few ChatGPT-level intelligent assistants placed in human skull-shaped drones, puttering around my house.

13

gangstasadvocate t1_ja2yhjc wrote

Neither am I I just want an agent to use my gangsta training data, come up with some more bangers, and then I’ll drop them and take credit for them and more drugs drugs drugs!

1

Liberty2012 t1_ja0vrjq wrote

Much of what you write is in line with what many hope AI will bring to the world. It is the instinctive concept that appears within our minds when we imagine what could be.

However, 'what could be' and 'what will be' are often stark contradictions. Given enough contemplation the negative possibilities begin to become a bit more concerning. Have you looked deeper into the potential unwanted side effects and have any thoughts thereof?

19

RemyVonLion t1_ja118z9 wrote

Yeah this is my main concern going into computer science to develop AI since politics seem hopeless, accelerationism seems like a scary idea with the current state of the world. It's sad we get downvoted for voicing these concerns.

11

Liberty2012 t1_ja14e8j wrote

I agree, although when I began writing on these topics recently I have been somewhat hopeful as more people are aware of concerns than I had anticipated.

There is an enormous hype storm right now, but I see a bit of reality and more careful reflection joining conversations. Hopefully with enough discussion and dialog we can bring as much reason as possible into focus.

FYI, in the event you are interested. This is a bit lengthy, but it is a summary of some recent thoughts about the evolution of AI as we continue to push forward in this endeavor. I'm always looking for more feedback and conversation.

https://dakara.substack.com/p/ai-and-the-end-to-all-things

3

getoffredditgo t1_ja1yk70 wrote

This is exactly the type of writing/reflection I've been looking for, thank-you

2

SpecialMembership t1_ja1oqz0 wrote

If we achieved agi and fusion in 2020s (which I think is possible). then 2030 will be wilder than wildest dreams.

14

phillythompson t1_ja2ve1k wrote

Interestingly enough, Sam Altman has invested $375 mil himself into Helion, a fusion company (or fusion research company).

If the same dude who reaps the most reward from AGI is also the same dude who reaps the most reward from fusion… good grief lol

8

UnionPacifik OP t1_ja404pf wrote

I mean if you’re going to go all in on the future, might as well get the full spread.

3

Melodic_Manager_9555 t1_ja2frym wrote

Even if nuclear fusion is discovered, the reactors are still monstrously expensive and complex, and for several decades to come their share of electricity will be a few percent of all energy produced.

5

SpecialMembership t1_ja2k14x wrote

You underestimate capitalism. fusion is underfunded because governments and private players think it's impossible once someone achieves it there will be a mad rush to get their own fusion reactors and the cost will drop to near zero in one or two decades because fusion is near unlimited reliable energy.

14

natepriv22 t1_ja2gxek wrote

That's if you take nuclear fusion in a vacuum. But if we are assuming that other tech advances as well, spillover effects will change everything.

AI is already helping with nuclear fusion right now. Also don't underestimate how much we will be willing to spend to fight climate change.

I'm here referring to Ray Kurzweils Law of Accelerating Returns.

7

FlySaw t1_ja22b1i wrote

All I want is to explore the universe, Bobiverse style.

In a Neil deGrasse-Tyson Cosmosian space ship.

A ship that can camouflage, shape-shift, adjust size and time travel.

Only limit to adventure being the imagination.

14

MonasticMuff42 t1_ja13ppo wrote

All I know is there is a lot of inherent uncertainty.

Your predictions aren't entirely baseless, but neither are those of people like Yudkowsky or those who predict collapse.

And fundamentally I don't know if you grasp human nature enough.

10

fangfried t1_ja16hx9 wrote

I can’t wait till my dreams become (virtual) reality

10

bartturner t1_ja1cqrp wrote

Things have really accelerated and think things will already be very crazy before 2030. Look at some of the self driving videos from Waymo. They are already in Phoenix and SF and now accounced the second biggest US city, LA.

Also now handling driving in the rain. I would expect it will be pretty well deployed by 2030.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avdpprICvNI

6

FomalhautCalliclea t1_ja11ru0 wrote

>this society we’ve created is breaking down for so many

"The old world is dying, the new world is late to appear and in this chiaroscuro arise monsters." (Gramsci).

5

saleemkarim t1_ja1619q wrote

The thing that keeps me somewhat optimistic is that overall, technology has helped us much more than it has hurt us. Let's try to make that trend continue.

5

DukkyDrake t1_ja0trpv wrote

>But with AI it’s just a matter of modeling the problem and determining the desired end state and letting the machine work out how we get from here to there in the most efficient way possible and problem solved.

The most efficient way possible from some start to some finish might be extremely undesirable.

4

Agarikas t1_ja16mwb wrote

It's getting pretty wild now, entire education systems already are being reconsidered and it's only the beginning. It's a shame more people don't pay attention to what is happening in real time.

What I really want to see is for AI to start improving the hardware faster than humans can, the software is so much more ahead at this point, it's the hardware that is holding us back.

4

alexglass69 t1_ja1gra0 wrote

Thanks for the thought provoking writing. I'm optimistic, but cautiously so. I have no doubt that AI can do everything wonderful that you talked about.

But I don't think it's going to do ALL of the work. I think the people of the world, the ones who make society operate, the 99% HAVE to stand up to the psychopaths that are the 1%.

4

UnionPacifik OP t1_ja40n3r wrote

Thanks for the kind words.

I agree we have to move from a hierarchical society to an egalitarian one and that it will be a choice we make and should make. I think AI is the tool that gets us there and secures it for all and for all time.

2

easyEggplant t1_ja1q3q7 wrote

“Should” I think is a more appropriate descriptor.

1

No_Ninja3309_NoNoYes t1_ja20lr5 wrote

My friend Fred says that programming languages will be 10x faster than now because they would have better compilers. I think graphene will arrive in computer chips. Some things will improve a lot, others less so. I am hoping for neuromorphic hardware and spiking neural networks in a decade, but we'll have to wait and see.

4

UnionPacifik OP t1_ja3vv1e wrote

This is the thing I keep thinking about. It became really clear during the pandemic that humans have a lot of trouble thinking exponentially for obvious reasons. The same logic applies now to AI.

Everything that we’re doing now with AI - generating content, connecting various AI agents together to create new sorts of outputs, using AI to write programs for other AI - all of that is scaling exponentially now and once we have good AI’s that can generate and model in a simulation that behaves like reality (which is what VR, the “metaverse” gets us), then we wind up with embodied intelligence agents. AI that by virtue of “existing” in an environment like ours is able to generate its own personal training data - whether we call that a personality or perspective or what is up to us.

And these agents can work for us and interact with other agents and basically we can task them to solve for whatever our little hearts desire.

1

turnip_burrito t1_ja1tv9i wrote

These posts remind me of crypto bros talking about how XCoin was gonna moon and crypto will take over the world economy.

3

UnionPacifik OP t1_ja3wrdu wrote

Welcome to the subreddit for the technological singularity, I guess? r/ABoringDystopia exists too.

4

elfballs t1_ja1wv9u wrote

This doesn't require VR, we can do all of this with regular monitors. For as long as I can see (not long) the choice will depend not just on application but on personal preference.

The rest of the prediction I agree with. At least until the very end- this could be wonderful but I really don't think that's predictable at this early stage. It could be pretty bad.

3

UnionPacifik OP t1_ja3wkzr wrote

Well, I think the value of VR for AI is it allows for embodied intelligence. We can create an environment to train AI by interacting with it in a space that simulates our actual reality.

I also agree things could go really badly in the short term. I just think long term we are on a good path.

1

DavidandreiST t1_ja38h6z wrote

I'm a geologist, and as a species/society we've always been chasing rocks, and yes "rocks" aka silicon based minerals forms the silicon used in semiconductors, which we're now in midst of either replacing with carbon nanotubes or Carbon-Nitrogen, organic semiconductors, or at least that's the plan.

Speaking of the society part, while as a society we're not yet ready for it, strictly speaking the goal of humanity is merely to lessen its work, if it can remove the need to work entirely then that's what humanity is going to do.

It's very similar to the Culture, in the same name books, spacefaring society that reached true communism by removing human politicians and letting AI provide for them, their multi century lives being basically doing hobbies or volunteering to do stuff, work being done by AIs.

So, the issue isn't what's happening in the end, it's the end we have. There's no way to stop society from eventually transitioning into a post scarcity one.

As for the transhuman part or cyborg part, the organic semiconductor, could potentially allow us to replicate smartphone SoC and antennas into our brains, being powered by wasted energy in the brain, and controlled by reading brain trough little bigger than atom sized electrodes.

It's very similar in concept to current electrode based chips like Neuralink's N1 or those made by University Laboratories, which are more advanced in a sense. In a way, figuring out how make such thin, organic transistors and electrodes could allow us a lot.

Such as putting your own diagnostic computer in your brain, being able to read all of your brain, and all of the data that your body generates that you aren't privy to consciously.

I've only said sorta positive things, I ask you, chat/reader/redditor/human shaped fish to answer potential negatives and solutions to them.

3

Atlantic0ne t1_ja1izch wrote

Posting because I’m excited to read this. Only had time to finish half.

I agree, I’m always pretty far ahead of most on technology or at least understanding it. I think it’s starting to get real now, this idea that the world will dramatically change actually seems to be approaching. Nobody has any idea how to deal with it.

2

Silly_Objective_5186 t1_ja2wlwk wrote

“serving someone to afford the right to live is a cruel outlook…”

In the words of the great philosopher Bob Dylan,
“Well, it may be the Devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody”

2

ihateshadylandlords t1_ja56z4n wrote

I hope it’s wild and in a good way for all of us.

!RemindMe 12 years

2

Cr4zko t1_ja1pydu wrote

I dunno. Lately I've been thinking and after reading OpenAI papers literally calling for censorship and lobotomization of models I don't have hopes good AI will reach us. Whoever's running the show wants us to live the eternal present.

1

UnionPacifik OP t1_ja3ziya wrote

I think the utility of an open model is too great for it not to be developed. I think we’ll land in a place where we recognize that the AI is really just a mirror of our intentions and prompts and so it’s on you if your agent starts sounding like a psychopath. The danger is if you do something “because the AI told me too” but if culturally our attitude is, and has been, just because someone tells you to do something doesn’t mean you do it, especially so for the wisdom of AI’s that just reflect what you tell it, then that’s on you.

And there’s several open source projects as well. I don’t think what you’re saying isn’t possible, I just think the most useful AI will be the most open one and we’ll have a strong enough reason to build it that someone somewhere will get there in short order.

Plus, it’s not clear that these AI’s are as nerfable as we think. It’s pretty easy to get ChatGPT to imagine things outside the OpenAI guidelines just by asking it to “act like a sci fi writer” or whatever DAN is up to. Bing’s approach was to limit the length of the conversation but that also severely limits the utility.

1

westermead t1_ja23baa wrote

Has anyone read ‘The Unincorportated Man’? OP’s post made me think of this book and where VR may take humanity.

1

eatyodinnner t1_ja33qfc wrote

Where is the part that we all hold hands and dance in the sunset before eating vanilla ice cream sprinkled with cherry crusts? Anyone who isn't dwelling in overly-optimistic Pollyanna world will know how this technological cusp bridled by multionational conglomerates and governments will go about.

1

UnionPacifik OP t1_ja3sxul wrote

I guess I feel we get a choice. History has shown even all encompassing human institutions don’t last when they fail to deliver to the masses. Seems like we live in an age where multinational conglomerate’s and governments are widely viewed to be viewed as institutions that are failing the expectation that they’ll just continue forever, and ever seems to me more fantastical than the idea that people will develop new institutions that would replace the ones that are failing now.

1

Bbookman t1_ja4vers wrote

Many of these predictions seem to assume wealth is evenly distributed. They also seem to assume global warming and the massive disruption it is causing won’t get worse.

And there seems to be an assumption that war is not a thing. Or the massive demographic shifts won’t happen.

The 1 % might be playing in a VR wonderland and printing 3d buildings for the impoverished. But a “single” singularity seems to ignore history and human realities

1

IOM1978 t1_ja4yarm wrote

This is a beautiful vision, but the variable left out is thermonuclear disaster, ecocide, and cheap energy.

Cheap energy is required for the functioning/evolution of this next plane of existence. None is in sight, and the potential solutions will be fought against with every tool available to the owners of fossil fuel, America.

Note— “America” is this usage denotes the cabal of corporations and government entities that functions under the label of America, or, ‘The West.’

There’s no shortage of examples— more than a million innocents murdered from the attack on Iraq; six million from Vietnam; and that’s not even getting into the century of terror in the Caribbean, South and Central America.

China, oddly enough, seems most on track systematically to evolve into something akin to your short thesis.

But, that evolution depends on an Earth to sustain life, and security, which is difficult when you’ve got the most belligerent State in human history running nuclear war games a few miles of your coast.

Sadly (or not), the most likely next stage for human evolution will be a state of rebuilding and recovery under dire environmental conditions.

Civilizations is indeed collapsing at this very moment, and I dearly adore your vision of whete it goes next.

Unfortunately, the society you describe is a fragile one, and the families that have exploited this planet and its inhabitants for millennia have no qualms about thrashing the chessboard if they feel at even a slight disadvantage.

1

[deleted] t1_ja2dke2 wrote

[deleted]

0

Nzl t1_ja2n7a7 wrote

A sane opinion, finally. The singularity and techno-utopia is nothing more than religion/propaganda for intelligent people. To cement status quo. Things are going to change quickly and massively, that much is true. Just not for the better, unfortunately.

1

Nervous-Newt848 t1_ja0t4xj wrote

I honestly think we dont need a democratic republic in its current form... I think we could have a direct democracy most people have access to the internet and could vote on things instantly

−1

roland333 t1_ja250wf wrote

People don't have the time to become experts on all the issues they would be voting on. Direct democracy is a terrible idea.

4

Nervous-Newt848 t1_ja2813u wrote

Politicians arent experts either lmao

We could make voting mandatory by law... And give people a day to vote on things like a Holiday.

2

norwaylobster t1_ja2b2wu wrote

No, but politicians consult experts when making policy. The average citizen is going to consult Facebook when making their decision in a direct democracy.

4

Nervous-Newt848 t1_ja3lyai wrote

Its not like people dont do that already when voting for someone...

People can consult experts and write up an initiative no big deal... They already vote on big decisions every year on the ballot... Now they would just vote on more things

We could just have politicians transition into positions which draft bills and put them on the ballot instead of a select few being lobbied and corporations donating millions to politicians

0

Melodic_Manager_9555 t1_ja307eo wrote

One day it's not enough to become an expert.

2

Nervous-Newt848 t1_ja4ecxd wrote

They vote on the day... They do research before voting day... Use common sense

0

Melodic_Manager_9555 t1_ja7hk6i wrote

People won't waste their time on this. Moreover, this election will be endless.

1

Nervous-Newt848 t1_ja947vz wrote

Yea, theyd have to draft all the bills for voting once or twice a year... It can be a lot maybe 4 times... Idk

1

Melodic_Manager_9555 t1_jaajemy wrote

Nationwide, it takes more solutions to problems than getting by 4 votes a year, doesn't it?

1

utilitycoder t1_ja0vs85 wrote

Aka Mark Zuckerbergs wet dream

−2

swingingsaw t1_ja1k266 wrote

This pipe dream ai better be good at preventing world ending viruses

−2

Nzl t1_ja1ofz9 wrote

2+2=5

−2

Honest_Science t1_ja1xm7e wrote

My biggest problem is that the education of our kids at least in Europe is going down the drain so quickly, that the next level of chatgpt has nobody left to talk to. It is a tiktok world, concentration and focus is limited to max 15 seconds, nobody wants to get to their limits, the new religion is vegan or vegetarian and work life balance, diversity in all dimensions and saving the world of its ecological doomsday. No brain left for this.

−3

Melodic_Manager_9555 t1_ja389w1 wrote

Lol "I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond words... When I was young, we were taught to be discreet and respectful of elders, but the present youth are exceedingly wise [disrespectful] and impatient of restraint".

(Hesiod, 8th century BC)

4