Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

User1539 t1_j5jj3wy wrote

Reply to comment by Original_Ad_1103 in People are already working on a ChatGPT + Wolfram Alpha hybrid to create the ultimate AI assistant (things are moving pretty fast it seems) by lambolifeofficial

I'm not comparing it to a human being, I'm saying many, many, jobs could be automated if we could take a single function of the lowest working human.

2

Original_Ad_1103 t1_j5ncul7 wrote

But it’s still a human, you just said “lowest working human”, why lowest? Why 70IQ? Just say factory worker, even a repetitive one, I’m not denying that repetitive simple jobs usually have people that aren’t good at complex tasking or of particular intelligence, but still, no need to bring IQ into this, that’s kinda rude. It’s like saying “Just need an AI who can do a repetitive task like a cashier with Down Syndrome’s.”

1

User1539 t1_j5ndt3y wrote

70 is the limit for getting Social Security and not having to work. It is literally the line where someone is expected to go out and get a job.

I'm literally saying we don't need 'smarter than human' AGI. An AI that could do the work we give to the people of whom we expect the least would be an existential change.

IQ is a common measure of someone's intelligence. But, if the mention of a measure of human intelligence offends you, then you probably shouldn't take part in conversations where human intelligence is routinely compared to machine intelligence.

1

Original_Ad_1103 t1_j5ng0j2 wrote

I’m just saying, i know IQ is a common measurement, and that it’s directly correlated with work. I’ve not seen that many comparison between IQ and machine intelligence in subs, certainly not low “IQ”. Even though the comparison is true, it’s still “offensive” to some cuz there’s discriminatory undertones to it. Like you said, taking the “slice of a 70IQ brain”, bruh, you could’ve made any other example. Like just a repetitive task, or taking the slice of a simple program that does the same thing over and over again.

1

User1539 t1_j5nhi04 wrote

No, you're being offensive.

70 is a measure of a human IQ. Lots of humans have an IQ of around 70. They're regular, hard working people. There's nothing wrong with them.

I'm using that number because it is a number used to determine if someone is capable of employment,not to determine if they're good people.

I'm saying if we took away all the jobs from people with 70 and below IQs, it would be earth shattering. Because those people do a lot of work. Good work. Like good people do.

I'm literally saying that most people worry about AI becoming smarter than the smartest human, forgetting that most of us fall far below that line, and replacing all the hard working people in factories is going to change EVERYTHING.

But, deep down, you think people with low IQs are disgusting, and anyone that talks about them must be insulting them. Because you literally can't imagine a world where someone with a 70IQ is simply a reference point, and not an insult.

If we were talking about flying jets, and I offhand mentioned the robot would have to be 6ft tall, as that is the height cutoff for flying a jet, would you be insulted on the pilots behalf? No. Because you don't think 6ft tall jet fighter pilots are 'less' and need your defending.

Not only do factory workers not need you to stick up for them, you're showing your true colors with how you're acting like they're so mentally challenged no one should talk about them at all.

1