If AI produces better Einsteins, etc -- does the argument really hold that humans need to keep having kids for civilization to continue to prosper?
pull down to refresh
35 sats \ 26 replies \ @Undisciplined 19 May
I don't think we need population growth for humanity to continue prospering as it is.
As I see it, the issue is more that the purpose of prosperity is to enable human flourishing. Less people, means less flourishing (other things equal).
reply
21 sats \ 25 replies \ @Satosora 20 May
Do you think the world will be a better place with less people?
reply
10 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 20 May
Not in general. It would be a better place without a small number of particular people, though.
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @Satosora 20 May
That is true.
The politicians, perhaps?
reply
10 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 20 May
Perhaps
reply
0 sats \ 21 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 20 May
Yes. We shall find out next year after ww3 breaks out. It will be much worse for a time, and then better, for the survivors.
reply
0 sats \ 20 replies \ @Satosora 20 May
No way WW3 is happening.
Its just a small skirmish.
reply
31 sats \ 19 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 20 May
I’m afraid it’s more likely that you believe. We can only hope it’s a minor conflict. But no, it’s all looking more like a global conflict between bifurcated economies that will take out a large slice of the world population.
Which is sad because we just got through a “once in a generation” pandemic only blow ourselves up with the weapons of war.
History repeats itself in cycles.
reply
10 sats \ 12 replies \ @Undisciplined 20 May
Not only do I agree that WW III is likely, I think we’re probably already in it.
Remember that the date given in hindsight for both previous world wars is long before anyone thought they were in such a conflict.
reply
21 sats \ 10 replies \ @Satosora 20 May
Even you believe there will be a WW3?
reply
10 sats \ 9 replies \ @Undisciplined 20 May
Yeah, I think we're in it already and have been for a few years.
view replies
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 20 May
I think you are right.
reply
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @Satosora 20 May
WW3 where?
Ukraine vs Russia?
Israel?
reply
21 sats \ 4 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 20 May
China+Russia vs NATO.
Other belligerents will take sides in the conflict, as in ww2.
“Everywhere”
reply
21 sats \ 3 replies \ @Satosora 20 May
I dont know...
I dont think the whole world will wrap themselves into war.
view replies
40 sats \ 0 replies \ @grayruby 19 May
Not if AI can solve longevity and humans can live 200 years.
reply
126 sats \ 2 replies \ @rizzling 19 May
This is not possible, you have to look at that what we call 'AI'.
The word intelligence in that context is not equivalent to the context of intelligence of mammals.
There were some discussions or suggestions to call these models not AI but PP (probability programs). And AI should only be used in the context of a real AGI (artifical general intelligence).
Furthermore, it is absolutely unclear whether it is even possible to develop AGIs. There are no programmers who can speak in this area without having the same in-depth knowledge in the areas of psychology and biochemistry. At the same time, a psychology and/or biochemist needs appropriate programming skills, although it actually goes far beyond simple programming to be precise.
Unfortunately, there are very few people like that in the world. It remains to be seen what results current research will deliver over time.
reply
31 sats \ 1 reply \ @freetx 19 May
Yes, I think we need "modified turing test". Sure, it can be difficult or impossible to tell the difference between a LLM and human, however, that LLM was seeded with conversation from conscious / intelligent humans, thus it renders the test invalid.
However all this is a moot point. Humans (esp since giving up God), love worshiping the various idols they create....therefore its conceivable a huge part of humanity decides LLMs are in fact "intelligent" and even "conscious" and treats them accordingly.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @rizzling 19 May
I will try to find any prompts to let gpt-4o reveal that its just code or even sending it in a loop
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 20 May
Something is wrong with the world if it is becoming too costly to have kids.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @TheBTCManual 19 May
I know its a bit scifi out there, and i'm not sure this Ai we see now will get to this point
But sometimes I think that if Ai does get to the general AI point it's actually the collective thinking of humanity, and it extends it beyond the limitations of the biological, if we're merely data, we can dematerialse the human experience and move beyond the current limitations.
We could transport that data to new worlds, reform it there, start again, to expand the pursuit of humanity to a wider universe with more resources to keep on exploring
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 19 May
This hinges on a good definition of civilization level prosperity.
I think humans will be happier in the company of their own kind, prospering with their own kind, but civilization prospering might not require humans be maximally happy.
reply