Depends on how early in the transition you lose your job and how long the transition is.

I think the transition could be anywhere between 5-20 years. Depending on how efficient and proactive a government is.

White collar jobs, except those at the very top of each field, will lose their jobs first. Or atleast start to make less.

Given this, you should have 5-20x your yearly expenses saved. Wealth in currency or assets may not be stable either. So really your only hope is that the government gets it's shit together

Bullshit speculation like this is what leads to failed socialist societies. I mean ideas like this would be discussed as a theory, then assumed to be true, circle jerked and actions taken based on them.

That's actually pretty bad. This means there will be a gap between when AGI arrives and when most jobs could get replaced.

Both urban and rural exodus to a semi urban environment. You want to be closer to where things are happening but not live a shitty life. Far enough to live a peaceful daily life but close enough to visit places if needed.

Nothing in the fast scenario is ever good. This sub thinks everyone will adapt as quickly but the vast majority will not because they have not this concept for years and the movies only show them the most negative scenarios.

Your slow scenarios are too slow. I would call 30 years as slow. This is also the best timeline wherein we get to prepare better.

So I think it's slow, adaptive and aligned with slow being 30 years that is best for us. But I think what will happen is fast, adaptive and unaligned

It scores at the 5th percentile on codeforces. It can barely solve medium hard questions on leetcode.

Most software development doesn't need one to be good at anything mentioned above. But they do indicate ones ability to do leap of logic required to solve something like AGI. GPT-4 is not ready for that yet.

The things that can slow it down are already in motion but they can only push it down so far.

(1) A recession causing a drain on the companies trying to build AI. A recession is here.

(2) A war or other critical event causing interest rates to go high, leading to defaults in startups and even established companies. Interest rate will go all the way to 6% this year.

(3) Hardware/cost limits being hit. Better hardware will ofcourse be available soon but it's harder now to just scale by pumping money. It's already reaching hundreds of millions of dollars, more is only possible by governments or high return rate on these AI models.

(4) Isolation of a large country like China from chip manufacturing and procuring for AI.

Other things that could happen

(*) GPT-4 being a bust and thereby eroding confidence.

(*) OpenAI and other companies fail to monetize.

(*) Scaling may have reached it's limits. Newer architectures take time.

But even with all this, it can only slow it down by 5-10 years. We will still likely have AGI in 2030s.

Glorified security camera. Grifters calling themselves creators and making money selling a 300 pound slow moving rock with cameras. All this money could be better spent elsewhere.

Context won't even matter. No single person wrote all those millions of lines of code. No single person needs to know all of it. Just the functionality of each module and how to use it is enough as context for others to use it and build their own module.

Essentially a 32k or even 8k context would itself be enough. But chatGPT as it is now is not robust.

People think everyone in a specific field has to get replaced but really most will get replaced by just productivity increases

No evidence, not even an anecdote and certainly no ability to understand that not everyone is definable within your limited world view and people have different perspectives and motivation.

Clearly someone here is lazy.

Did some digging. They used 800000 cells, it never got to superhuman levels, human cells are better than mouse cells.

Things to take away, 800k is not equivalent to 800k parameters. 800k cells might equal anywhere between 800m to 8b parameter(1000 - 10000 synapses per neuron). If a bloody 800m parameter model can't learn to play ping pong like a superhuman it's not really that great. However, it probably does converge sooner, given that the way neurons learn in brain isn't like a feed forward network.

The most curious thing here is that apparently neurons work by trying to reduce entropy. Looks like all of life is trying to do the same at many levels.

Exactly. But even scarier is the fact that initial set of people who will lose jobs will go from high paying to not even UBI yet. Without UBI this will be chaos in just 5-6 years.

That's what I mean. There will be ubi by the time one would run out of Money if they had 10x yearly expenses saved

I understand your feeling, I feel the same way too. I honestly don't know what to do either. Right now here's what I think makes sense.

It is likely software development will be one of the first things to get disrupted along with art. You don't have replace everyone just increase productivity greatly. This is unfortunate as those who lose job need to fend for themselves till UBI.

(1) If financial security is an issue you must be at your job till you get replaced and learn to use AI as a tool and prolong the inevitable replacement as long as possible.

(2) Assess how good GPT-4 will be at coding. Given it will be heavily trained on code and openAI is offering foundry to companies, it must be the best model for a while.

(2a) If GPT-4 is poor at programming continue on till next big model.

(2b) If GPT-4 or any other new model is reasonably good at it. Do the following based on how well off you are.

If you have greater than 10X yearly expenses saved. Quit and enjoy life.

If you have greater than 5X yearly expenses saved. Quit and enjoy life at reasonable expenses with some odd jobs along the way.

If less than 5X but greater then 3X saved. Continue working till you get replaced but chill a bit.

Less than 3X saved then we don't really have a choice now do we.

Air.

I'm surprised someone is dumb enough to not understand that things lose value when there is lots of supply and it's usefulness is irrelevant if you can't corner a market.

Hoarders hoard to reduce supply. Can't do so in a world which can create ever more stuff. If hoarding even makes sense in a world with crazy supply.

What has value when it's supply is infinite or cheap.

It should have persistence. That is hard to achieve when the model is big and slow. Especially if the model gets slower because of adding persistence and multimodality

No I hate communism. People who are currently calling themselves communist are deluded and can't see that power is the problem and not money. This is capitalism but the whole world and everyone in it are capitalists with equal share and AI is the working underclass. :P

Labour costs will eventually be zero with AI workers.

Nope. We have a crazy amount of resources. We lack the energy to extract and seperate it. We literally sit on the biggest rock of minerals in the solar system.

People don't need unlimited amounts of anything they ofcourse want it. But if something was unlimited and cheap most people won't use as much. It's like the corporate policy of unlimited leaves, if you give people infinite leaves they actually take less than the sanctioned leaves.

People underestimate how much land there is. Even if we want to limit our total area we can always give everyone more vertical space.

Money won't matter. It is very unlikely that society would tolerate some having an obscene amount of land while others don't when individual value addition is zero. AI is about to make everybody equal, equally pointless, and unlike the failed communist attempts at the same, forced equality now is not gonna be an economic disaster.

Don't be just the core when you can be so much more.

10 years too late