Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 69
1/5/2025, 4:22:08 AM
X
In reply to:
Alice (e/nya)馃悎鈥嶁瑳
@Alice_comfy
路
321d
@ZourrexSlim @GaryMarcus If everything valuable is no longer derived from humanity, then wealth doesn't really work. Maybe it's a UBI like quota, or maybe humans trade art from eachother, or something else the AGI cannot do.

I don't think it would work (for the humans) psychologically.
Alice (e/nya)馃悎鈥嶁瑳
@Alice_comfy
路
321d
@ZourrexSlim @GaryMarcus I'm not entirely convinced it's even possible, if it is, I don't think wealth ends up working under such a scenario.

I don't really know if it would be utopia, dystopian or something else. Forecasting it now, is the domain of sci fi.
Slim
@ZourrexSlim
路
321d
@Alice_comfy @GaryMarcus Knowing 'humanity' I think we wont officially switch and its just gonna get modified until its something else.

Dont think money will vanish that fast but in any case...trying to predict post singularity doesnt make too much sense ig
Alice (e/nya)馃悎鈥嶁瑳
@Alice_comfy
路
321d
@GaryMarcus In the short term? I think by the true definitions of AGI you don't really have capitalism anymore once it's achieved.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
路
322d
IF proceeds were distributed equally, maybe.

But all signs point to the contrary. A few oligarchs may become insanely wealthy, but don鈥檛 expect people who won鈥檛 even compensate artists to share that wealth with you.
Tsarathustra
@tsarnick
路
322d
Stuart Russell says success at building AGI would be the biggest event in human history because it would mean supporting everybody on Earth in "an objectively splendid style of life" since the minimum cash value of AGI would be $15 quadrillion

The statement engages in a discussion about wealth distribution and societal changes in the context of AGI, which is a public issue. The tone is skeptical and somewhat dismissive, questioning the likelihood of the wealthy relinquishing their assets.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly harm others but implies skepticism about societal change.
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it is more focused on skepticism.聽[-1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments, but it does not foster constructive dialogue either.
  5. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds free speech and uses the platform to express a viewpoint, though it could be more constructive.