[schnitzelstoat]

Food is a solved problem. We can grow far more food than we need and we stop doing so simply because the low prices mean it's not economically viable.

In the places where famine remains a problem, it's due to political issues, not that we can't grow enough.

And growing all that food requires a tiny workforce compared to 400 years ago before the Agricultural Revolution. AI might extend such a massive reduction in labour requirements to many other industries.

[ben_w]

> We can grow far more food than we need and we stop doing so simply because the low prices mean it's not economically viable.

Half. This depends on there being a reliable source of cheap fertiliser, which would be much more secure if not for the situations regarding Hormuz and Russia.

[darkwater]

> Food is a solved problem.

Mmmmmh

> We can grow far more food than we need and we stop doing so simply because the low prices mean it's not economically viable.

So, it's not a solved problem. Last time I checked we have plenty of people in several parts of the world with difficulties to access the required level of food to be healthy.

[Daishiman]

> In the places where famine remains a problem, it's due to political issues, not that we can't grow enough.

The political issues are still there so I really don't think we can call that a solved problem.

[pixl97]

That's what you misunderstand, that's why we're making the AI. Have the AI get rid of all the people then AI can grow all the crops it needs!

[dminik]

Technologically yes, but this is a vast oversimplification.

You need lots of money to be able to buy the tech you need to do so. And you can't exactly earn that from not using the tech, since foreign (or even local) competition will slaughter you on prices. And if you do make it, you're stuck with a low-margin race to the bottom on price.

[pixl97]

So capitalism with market protections?