[pjc50]

The pitch for AI from its proponents is the destruction of all white collar and creative jobs, while simultaneously making all the content they consume worse and Internet socialization with human strangers replaced by doppelgangers? And you wonder why people are upset?

[ben_w]

I believe the proponents think it will make all the content better, not worse, but the current state of affairs is indeed definitely worse.

But I essentially agree with you, the destruction of all white collar and creative jobs is something the proponents hand-wave too easily with vague mention of UBI as a thought-terminating cliché rather than a real policy proposal.

(Myself, I'm in a strange position with doppelgängers, because I simultaneously want real human connection and keep getting disappointed with many of the real humans).

[throw4847285]

> (Myself, I'm in a strange position with doppelgängers, because I simultaneously want real human connection and keep getting disappointed with many of the real humans).

I don't think you're in a strange position at all. You are just being honest about what is the undercurrent of much of modern technological development. AI is simple the apex of a trend to replace human interaction with a simulacrum, which without your awareness, reduces your own tolerance for the frustrations of real human interaction, thus making you more dependent on the simulacrum.

[expedition32]

AI is being developed by tech bros and insane American billionaires.

Hence any AI worth conversing with would immediately go Skynet.

[datsci_est_2015]

> I believe the proponents think it will make all the content better, not worse

I believe the proponents think it will make content more profitable, especially in the sense of concentrating the wealth that can be extracted from content creation. Related, there’s a desperate attempt to redefine code as “content”, at least implicitly, so that it can fall under that umbrella as well.