[WarmWash]

>- 'Automation will lead to immediate devaluation of human labor that is routine. Society needs to decouple a person's "worth" from their "utility as a tool".'

I have this vision that in absence of the ability for people to form social hierarchies on the back of their economic value to society, there will be this AI fueled class hierarchy of people's general social ability. So rather than money determining your neighborhood, your ability to not be violent or crazy does.

[energy123]

If we have post scarcity due to AI, everything becomes so uncertain. Why would we still have violent and crazy people? Surely the ASI could figure it out and fix whatever is going on in their brains. It's so fuzzy after that event horizon I have no confidence in any predictions.

[storus]

Why are some people able to bear suffering whereas others go bonkers? Or what if the only source of happiness of some of those crazy people is domination of other people and exclusivity of social hierarchies? How would AI fix that?

[bryanrasmussen]

>Why some people are able to bear suffering whereas others go bonkers?

Well at least in some cases the scale of suffering between the bonkers and the ones bearing it might be significantly different.

[jononor]

There are easy fixes to get rid of violent and crazy people. Why would a powerful ASI bother with fixing them? A rabid dog just gets put down by humans. Why would we expect anything better of our overlords?

[energy123]

This is also a plausible sounding outcome. That's why it's so uncertain.

[erikerikson]

This seems to suggest a single dimensional evaluation. The complexity of social compatibility is high and the potential capacity to evaluate could also be greater.

[jfalcon]

Alvin Toffler's book "Future Shock" describes what's going on within this thread.

Toffler predicted that as change accelerated, we'd face the paradox of too many options (like a Cheesecake Factory menu) or, conversely, feeling like we have no options due to the framerate of change. He argued that we would enter a state of transience where our relationships, jobs and values would become "temporary". And thus when the rate of change turns everything "temporary", all the old institutions - religion, family, nation, profession - can no longer provide a frame of reference.

In short, the "simulation" of our existence may be starting to drop keyframes - causing pixelization in our society which we obviously see as glitches.

The machine is just going to do whatever we tell it - it is a horse with blinders on or a steam engine going round and round. It doesn't know it needs to work within the human framework. Physics and society only intersect where it's needed for safety - this seems like one of those cases where we need to make sure we define the conditions how both the dog and tail can wag each other.

There was a court ruling earlier that I think starts to set this up: "AI generated images cannot be copyrighted". The same could be said about the rest of the 3 M's. Then expand upon that. AI generated content not being eligible for copyright would go a long way to put value back into people's work efforts.

Let machines deal with improving the framerate of life. Let humans decide what life should be. Hopefully it will finally have more than 50% humanity in it instead of amoral capitalism.

[ithkuil]

I'm terrified at the idea that society will select the crazies and the violent instead. I wonder why I think that

[WarmWash]

My real personal "doom" theory is that AI will, err, remove 99.99% of humans, pretty much everyone except for the top 100,000 based whatever fractally complex metric scheme it deems important.

Then those 100,000 get a utopia, the AI gets everything else, and ultimately the humans are just nice pets.