This is my direction to my department at work. If you find a problem, have a solution when you bring it to me. Doesn't have to be the right solution but at least try.

I try to use it for family/personal quarrels etc.

Taiwan War is doubtful.

China is watching Russia destroy itself in Ukraine and has realized they can't win an amphibious assault and occupation of the island.

They even condemned Russia for the rocket in Poland (before it was determined to be Ukrainian). This shows they are siding with world consensus against the war and will not risk one for Taiwan.

Russian losses have been shocking to western observers. There is concern now that the war may go so badly that they use nukes - I agree this is a worry. I think western powers are providing enough equipment & intelligence to allow Ukraine to eat up Russia manpower until it collapses, but are trying to limit expansion into Russian territory.

I think I understand you. Likely scale is all that is needed for a non-volitional AGI, and that may be all that is needed for accelerating technological change. Humans can provide the volitional aspect of the system.

>Gato 2 (or whatever they call the scaled Gato they're working on) drops, confirms scale is all we need.

If scale is all we need, AGI by end of 2023.

It may not be released publicly but will become apparent to those in the industry and copied where possible.

I am not convinced that scale is all we need but would be happy to be wrong.

Hmmm. I appreciate your responses, you've given me some things to think about. It's likely that regions/countries will approach these issues differently which will give us opportunity to see what works.

I still think there will be work for people, but it may be "make work" of the FDR New Deal style.

I understand that point of view, I'm trying to provide a counterpoint. Just because the industrial revolution eliminated 90% of agricultural Era jobs didn't mean that people were just cattle to be culled. Same thing with the decline of manufacturing.

Prior economic revolutions replaced existing employment with higher paying, more productive work. The same thing will happen over the next 20 years. I don't know what it will look like - maybe early career starts as a manager of AI/robotic "workers." Maybe AGI psychologist becomes a popular field.

Although UBI sounds like a great idea that's fair and helps everyone, it seems to devalue individual worth. "You can't do as well as the machines, so we'll put you out to pasture." There's an under current of defeatism to it, but I think the AI revolution offers a more positive future even as it is destructive.

Gotcha.

I don't think there is a more sustainable system than capitalism.

All of the progress and wealth generated in past 200 hundred years has been from capitalism. Even perverted, not quite free markets in China have done more in 20 years than all of the five year plans of socialism combined.

I also understand that the portion of wealth flowing to labor has been declining since 1971 (https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/), but the average person's access to the other side of the ledger has increased too.

Maybe an option is having social security buy into capital markets and give non-investors upside access to capital gains. Whatever options are tested, the only guarantee is that systems with the freest markets where labor and capital compete to provide goods and services will be the most successful.

What you're describing is still capitalism, the competitive market where free actors can allocate resources in the manner that produces the best return.

Everyone right now can in fact own the means of production in this system. Everyone can invest some of their earnings in the stock market. Just buying QQQ guarantees ownership of the top 100 fastest growing large companies on NASDAQ.

QQQ has averaged 16%/yr for the past 10 years. A low end worker making $15/hr could invest 10% of earnings per year in QQQ and be a millionaire in 25 years even if he never got a raise.

You don't need UBI, or special training, expensive schools, a pedigree or the right background. You just need to save a little money.

Few on this sub will understand you. They're brainwashed into thinking capitalism=bad and socialism=good and don't realize the same "sociopaths" end up on top in either system.

At least capitalism forces them to produce a good or service that's of value in order to maintain their position.

Glad my company closed offices and adopted permanent WFH. I have a good resume and get contacted by recruiters a lot with "flexible" WFH offers; why would I trade 100% WFH for 3 days in office? It's obvious that the next recession will see these places go to 100% in office as a way to cut staff and justify lease expense.

I saved my company $1.6M per year by identifying leases we could get out of or sublet or renegotiate. It's not clear to me why every company isn't doing the same thing.

Turn empty office space into data center space. Many of these offices already have the redundant internet and power needed or could be retrofitted for it. DC wholesale leases are higher on a per square foot basis than office and we'll need 10x the space by 2030 imho. It's a win-win.

Heck, CBRE should be kicking companies out that aren't using space fully and proactively replacing with data centers.

I'd look for unusually large hardware purchases or development of novel computer processing to start. Any company or government which developed AGI would want to capitalize on it quickly by expanding its abilities or duplicating it to work on additional tasks.

So if NVDA gets bought out by TSLA and all processor development is utilized for in house projects, you might suspect TSLA has built an AGI and wants to secure the supply chain for new hardware. Or if META designs a new processing chip and licenses it to a manufacturer for its own exclusive use and buys gobs of it, you might think Facebook cracked AGI and needs more power to run it.

Governments might build AGI too, so look for unusual state hardware purchases or data center builds, plus highly successful policy decisions. For instance the USA able to neutralize terrorist cells they couldn't identify before, or China leapfrogging everyone in weapons development.

The first mover advantage will be huge since any AGI can be scaled up by speed and numbers, if not in some qualitative way. I disagree with Kurzweil's idea that it will take 16 years after AGI before reality breaks. There will be a hard takeoff by necessity because any time spent pondering the risks of expanding AGI is time that an unfriendly actor can build AGI and overpower you.