• 2 Posts
  • 37 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 28th, 2023

help-circle


    1. You are assuming that the current medical scene won’t improve. It is very likely that we’ll eliminate the “old person lying in bed, dying” visual altogether due advancements in the medical field (especially accelerated further by development in AI)
    2. The “human touch” is not impossible to replicate for machines. You aren’t seeing machines capable of that right now, because the field of personal care robots are in their absolute infancy. “The human touch” at the end of the day, is just warm, soft skin paired with a caring voice. We have already replicated the caring voice.
    3. Elder care robots won’t be cold, metal bodies going “Boop boop, shit in bed defected, Boop boop engaging cleanup procedure…”. They would be really kind voices, soft hands with an experience of more than a thousand years of handling thousands of patients. They would never become impatient, they would never feel bad or disgusted.

    Of course, advancements in this tech won’t stop humans from caring for the elderly. You can still care for ur grandpa. However, ur grandpa won’t die if u don’t.

    Here’s the best case scenario - you can be with ur grandpa, chat, play video games, do fun stuff. When it’s time to change the diaper, a professional robot trained for this very purpose does the job.




  • Exactly. There’s a very clear path to monetisation for the bigger tech companies (ofc, not the random startup that screams “AI quantum computing blockchain reeeee”).

    Lemmy is just incredibly biased against AI, as it could replace a shit ton of jobs and lead to a crazy amount of wealth inequality. However, people need to remember that the problem isn’t the tech- it’s the system that the tech is being innovated in.

    Denying AI is just going to make this issue a lot worse. We need to work to make AI be beneficial for all of us instead of the capitalists. But somehow leftist talk surrounding AI has just been about hating on it/ denying it, instead of preparing for a world in which it would be critical infrastructure very soon.


  • I have no idea how people can consider this to be a hype bubble especially after the o3 release. It smashed the ARC AGI benchmark on the performance front. It ranks as the 175th best competitive coder in the world on Codeforces’ leaderboard.

    o3 proved that it is possible to have at least an expert AGI if not a Virtuoso AGI (according to Deep mind’s definition of AGI). Sure, it’s not economical yet. But it will get there very soon (just like how the earlier GPTs were a lot dumber and took a lot more energy than the newer, smaller parameter models).

    Please remember - fight to seize the means of production. Do not fight the means of production themselves.





  • Hm, makes sense ig. Basically, what u’r saying is this from what I understood - AI romance/sex bots capable of making a significant drop in birth rates would come before AI bots that bring in labor post scarcity.

    While I agree with this, I don’t think that the time difference between the two events would be significant enough for the drop in birth rate to be that damaging. Why? Because I’m assuming that development in AI would be that fast. I can’t think of many reasons as to why tech that makes it possible to serve as a good enough romantic partner (which is quite a complex task) can’t serve as a mental health therapist (with different fine tuning of course), customer service, retail, admin, secretary, etc.

    One doesn’t need to replace 100% of jobs to cause unemployment related issues in the market. I think the effects of unemployment would be seen first before the effects of potentially dropping birth rates.


  • Your conclusion is based upon an assumption that we need more humans to progress as society. If AI develops to the point where it is better as a partner than a human being, it likely means that we have achieved, or are very close to achieving labor post scarcity (the assumption being that an AI capable of achieving this is capable enough to do most/all human work).

    When we achieve labor post scarcity, the number of humans has nothing to do with progress. Therefore, falling birthrates won’t have any negative effect on progress.

    When we achieve labor post scarcity in the medical field, life expectancy would increase, with us achieving biological immortality at a certain point. This means, that death rates also go down.

    Considering the above, I thought you were referring to “dating and fucking AI partners” as the end of human progress (presumably because of a lack of any motivation to cause any more development). That’s what my reply was talking about.






  • It seems that LIDAR based self driving tech (the one that Waymo uses) is miles ahead than 2d camera based tech (the one that Tesla uses).

    I’m really excited for this being implemented for city buses. Currently, in lower density areas, there are two choices - have smaller buses with more frequency, or have larger buses with less frequency. The problem with smaller buses is that you need more drivers. The problem with larger buses is that frequency becomes low, thus disincentivizing usage of public transit.

    Self driving city buses would be really cool as driver costs would be 0. This would mean, that smaller buses/vans would be able to run at fixed routes at really high frequencies.




  • I don’t understand why the knee jerk reaction for everything is just “ban it”.

    You want to reduce the exposure of children to predators? Moderate the platforms. We can agree that Reddit n Lemmy’s moderation is a lot better than Instagram’s moderation. Why don’t we start with that???

    The biggest way predators do their predatoring is by sliding into ur DMs. You could restrict this by requiring approval for all such new DMs by a parent’s account or something. There r just so many ways that social media can be made safer for kids.

    Social media is a digital townsquare. Sure, there r some malicious actors lurking about. Does that mean that kids should just be banned from this townsquare? No. The townsquare should be made safer for kids. There must be some hand-holding for kids in the beginning so that they can learn how to make the best use of this infrastructure in the future.