Haha I don’t think I would need to do that just yet. But now that you said it, perhaps a sexbot might have very interesting use cases for threesomes, eh?
Haha I don’t think I would need to do that just yet. But now that you said it, perhaps a sexbot might have very interesting use cases for threesomes, eh?
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.
Why’s that dark? It’s a free future. The young don’t have to clean up after their elders anymore.
Oh they were Khamas too /s
RIP. I can’t even begin to imagine what their families n friends must be feeling rn
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.
Fuck trump and fuck his social media platform. Please don’t link that shit here
Ooo someone really likes bunnies, huh
Looks like someone needs to give this fellow a bunny too, eh?
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.
Spending all time dating AI partners means that we have achieved labor post scarcity. If labor post scarcity isn’t achieved, then it means you have to do a job to survive (like now), thus not spending entire time with AI partners.
Achieving labor post scarcity means that scientific progress too would stop being connected with the economic productivity of individuals. Basically, AI scientists. Scientific progress means expansion of humanity through space.
Therefore, your great filter idea doesn’t really hold imo.
I know it’s going to be a really bad 4 years for everyone (Americans and Canadians both in this context), but I’m really excited to see the “leopards eating my face” content that’ll be coming up.
Ik ik it’s wrong as innocent people will suffer a lot, but still… I’m really excited to see what the fascists have to say when inflation goes through the roof due to their beloved Fuhrer’s new sales taxes.
Naah I like the wide spaces on the left and right. It looks too cluttered otherwise with unnecessary information
Anything but Mastodon/Activitypub, eh? These fellas rlly love sucking on corporate dicks, don’t they
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.
Wanna bet that it was the Russians?
Fuck the Indian state and its enablers.
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.
Wow, a really interesting project! Fuck the haters OP! Checking it out rn!