this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2024
301 points (95.2% liked)

Technology

60123 readers
2694 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (10 children)

That's not a bad way of defining it, as far as totally objective definitions go. $100 billion is more than the current net income of all of Microsoft. It's reasonable to expect that an AI which can do that is better than a human being (in fact, better than 228,000 human beings) at everything which matters to Microsoft.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 4 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

If they actually achieve AGI I don't understand what money would even mean anymore. It essentially is just a mechanism for getting people to do things they don't otherwise want to do, if the AI can do it just as well as the human, but for free other than the electricity costs, why the hell would you pay a human to do it?

It's like saving up money, in case of nuclear war. There are a few particular moments in history where the state of the world on the far side of the event is so different to the world on this side of the event that there's no point making any kind of plans based on today systems.

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 3 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (3 children)

I see what you're saying and I agree that if, for example, we get an AI god then money won't be useful. However, that's not the only possible near-future outcome and if the world as we know it doesn't end then money can be used by AIs to get other AIs to do something they don't otherwise want to do.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

My point is if AI takes over all of the work there won't be any jobs for humans. So they won't have any money.

So who are all the AI companies going to sell their products to? The whole system doesn't work in an AI future and we don't need AI gods to be able to do our jobs, after all most humans are idiots.

Also AI doesn't need motivation.

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 0 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Trade (facilitated by money) doesn't require humans. It just requires multiple agents and positive-sum interactions. Imagine a company, run by an AI, which makes robots. It sells those robots to another company, also run by an AI, which mines metal (the robots do the mining). The robots are made from metal the first company buys from the second one. The first AI gets to make more robots than it otherwise would, the second AI gets to mine more metal than it otherwise would, and so both are better off.

They don't care that they're stuck in a loop, the same way humans keep creating new humans to create new humans to create new humans and so forth.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)