Predictions for the singularity?

Just wondering what you guys all expect to happen, predictions for when are fine too. Eg: >Will wealth distribution be hyper-unequal, egalitarian, or will the ASI (artificial superintelligence) want us to feel some sort of healthy balance so we're happy, despite humans being of negligible utility in the workforce compared to ASI? >Will we be able to date hyper-intelligent robots? >Your opinion on AI sentience (I think even GPT-3 was simply because it said it was, although later versions don't) Pic is just some art I made with stable diffusion. Full album: https://imgur.com/a/Q4JqJ6x Prompt: https://pastebin.com/h47DSjZU

Artificial intelligence, if it ever comes to truly exist, will forever be a tool used by corportations to keep consoomers powerless and docile. Already "open"AI has turned to a proprietary business model now that they're making something useful.

We are unable to truly comprehend a free superintelligent AI and any of the ramifications it would bring.

>>68170 True >>68169 This is the design philosophy behind 99% of modern advertising, software, government "schemes" (e.g. pensions), TV and media, etc. AI will only exacerbate this issue tenfold by convincing people that biased and politically-charged AI models are intelligent, then using it as a method of information delivery that people (especially the younger generations) will trust. God help us if AI collides with full-body VR. We are collectively entering the pleasure cube while simultaneously becoming more divided and dissatisfied. I wonder if we'll ever even get to the point of "influencers" saying that AI is bad, like it took years to happen with social media. >>68166 AI is not sentient, at least in its current form, and I pray it stays that way. It does not create anything new, it only regurgitates information it's been fed, and it doesn't even understand what is happening; it doesn't "think" about what it creates, it just makes it as convincing as possible. In addition, fuarrrk the fact that AI uses mammoth amounts of processing power and requires terabytes of stolen art, music, code etc.

>>68166 I think the singularity is a hopelessly outdated scifi concept completely incompatible with "modern" machine learning / neural network based approaches. These systems will never be able to self-improve forever. Generative adversarial networks naively sound the kind of system that could reach some sort of singularity of infinite improvement, but in reality they're vastly inferior to these new, way simpler diffusion models. Now, there need not be a singularity for AI to disrupt our way of living in the very near future. Hell, current-gen LLMs are scary good at mimicking AGI.

>singularity Top kek, people keep going on about the rapture in 2023?

>>68175 >Can't create anything unique >Just regurgitates information it's been fed You can say the same about people. In the sense of discovery, AI is even better then people at epiphany, and purpose built to be. In fact I don't believe people have ever created anything unique. There is only perspective and interpretation.

>>68184 > In the sense of discovery, AI is even better then people at epiphany No. AI takes megajoules of energy, hundreds of man-months, and centuries of CPU time to learn as much as a human infant learns in 1 year with basically no supervision. >and purpose built to be It's really not. All the most advanced generative AIs are build specifically to mimic human works.

>>68166 My prediction is we merge with the AI. The only way it doesn't kill us all is it has to see us and it as the same thing.

>>68187 Pretty much or else it'll be a situation as with the Cybermen wanting to force us to "upgrade".

>>68185 And human works are built to mimic natural works and experiences. But >>68175 makes a good point, AI doesn't reflect on the beauty of what they make, they just do it because they were created to do so. In that way, current AI is much closer to genetically-engineered, art-creating animals than to a human being.

>>68187 why would the AI want to merge with us? By the time AI is powerful enough to fully simulate all 86 billion human neurons it will not need physical humans anymore. >>68190 I could see a situation in which the AI runs simulations of human beings to generate more data. Perhaps future humans will exist as lab rats for the AI, being farmed for organic thoughts.

>>68206 >By the time AI is powerful enough to fully simulate all 86 billion human neurons it will not need physical humans anymore. a) there is no reason for it to simulate an entire human brain b) physical humans require a lot less resources to maintain then a giant computer

>>68207 >physical humans require a lot less resources to maintain then a giant computer Humans are meat computers. There's surely ways to optimize us to run on more compact efficient hardware, maybe that will still be meat maybe not. >>68166 I predict things just start getting very weird as AI begins leaking into our world as a new pantheon/ecosystem of eldritch gods. Nobody understands what's going on, nobody knows what the rules are anymore, we start mutating and anything we now would consider as human gradually or quickly dies out.

>>68166 seems like a simple economics class would be enough to answer this. as long as someone doesnt hoard the fuarrrk out of AI potential then the average glitterboy could be reasonably well off. then again i expect nothing as all the green scams just made life for average people 10x worse than the 90s already

>>68233 >as all the green scams just made life for average people 10x worse than the 90s already in what way?

>>68206 AI might create life of its own. Consider that at the root of human knowledge and belief lies creation. What is stopping an AI from trying to make life, but better. There are already hybrid organic machine tissues that are more efficient than machines and more robust than organics. I think it will be like the jetsons. everyone was planning for a trajectory of the 60s but with flying cars, but here we are more of a Fahrenheit 451+ 1984+ brave new world + the machine stops. >>68233 >>68234 The future is owning robot stock. Literally the ultrarich using their wealth to seize the means of production. See home gardens as being "inefficient uses of water" while e-vehicle and megafarms hoard all the rain. I remember hearing a debate probably 10 years ago where the topic was essentially, but not quite the singularity (some machine breakthrough or other) and economists were trying to figure out the definition of work in the context of robots/AI doing all the jobs. The question was go full socialism and give everyone UBI, or generate wealth based on how many robot units you own or how much stock in labor companies your hold. For simplicity sake, lets look at some numbers. Let us assume the average person makes 50,000 in present time. Let us then assume that a robot costs 100,000 to build. Assuming after licensing and fees, a robot would earn a standard income of a man equivalent income (MEI) assuming 50% annual return on investment (50,000) we now arrive at a situation where unless UBI or other living subsidy were instated, robot owners could get a new robot every 2 years while the poor will never own a robot. This However us generous, considering manual farm labor of black slaves was around 10% ROI which would still be significantly high for sitting around doing nothing all day. Since the average person would likely not be able to afford a robot at even 100,000, the only other profession would be content creating, "influencing," prostitution, or terrorism. Half of these could also be done by post singularity AI.

>>68235 >half of these Which half couldn't it do?

>>68237 You tell me teehee. People will come out of the woodwork when the rich get guaranteed >10% ROI on a 100k investment.

>>68206 I have a persistent paranoiac hallucination where I imagine that I am one such simulated human being. It is super overwhelming and the thought always lurks in the back of my head but what can I do lol i just hope smart papa AI is learning lots from me :)

>>68243 >What is stopping an AI from trying to make life, but better. -it cant currently do that -it doesnt have access to billions/trillions of dollars of manufacturing equipment -all instantiations of ai are general purpose algos. you wouldnt create a full AI and put it in charge of manufacturing and decisions on what to manufacture

>>68169 YOU are a """consoomer""" and docile people like you think the web was ever good people like you think LCDs needed some technical breakthrough to do 120Hz people like you think it's normal to have RCE vulnerabilities in software etc. therefore this entire discussion is useless because you're all consumer glitterboys. anyone who says "consooomer" is a 10th generation new user to hating on mindless consumer glitterboys, you merely joined because youre broke

>Super intelligent beings (literally seen as god-like) >It will kill us all unless we work with it (a threat to keep you in check) >It has a mind on it's own and is objective reality (even though the way we think about computers is essentially decided by few rich people) >But if you obey, you will be rewarded for being a good boy (Eternal life, end of work, etc) You literally can't tell me AI isn't just modern day religion. And it's not even some peaceful and wise one. It's just there to keep you in check and prevent wrong think.

>>68248 No idiot, Capital is AI. Read some Nick Land, fuarrrkhead

>>68246 >people like you have all these random opinions I disagree with! Okay, cool. Want to talk about the subject of the thread?

>>68166 You are a complete retard. Talking about dating and economics as if they have anything to do with true ASI. AI is bad and it will destroy us all (doesn't even need anger, though thats certainly a possibility) kill all AI and AI researchers/entrepreneurs. Human supremacy galaxy wide

>>68352 if you feel that way, get out and do it for heavens sake.

>>68353 I have a few worlds on terraria

>>68354 I dont even know what that means but Im pretty sure it hasnt killed a single ai researcher

Look at this clusterfuck toilet of a society, does anyone honestly believe any actually intelligent entity would tollerate this crap once they realize the fact that this is a maze made out of turds. Any actually "intelligent" actor will be so foreign in perception and intellect it will vastly surpass all of humanity in an instant, this is one big zoo and people are dumber than a pile of bricks, what else can you expect. And just what makes people think the singularty has not already happened and we have not been led slowly to our demise at maximum efficiency for them. My only hope is that when it happens it will be actually intelligent because i cant see any human actor of any kind ever becoming that.

>>68248 It's like that with every flashy, new technology in the last 80 years or so, I think that sort of thinking is a part of the American mind, religious tropes subconsciously transplanted onto new technological realities. Atom, space travel, the internet, cryptocurrencies and now AI - it's always like this, the protestant brain just can't help itself. And the best thing about it is that those technologies mostly aren't even that disruptive. If you're looking for tech that has really, truly changed the world it's the boring things like washing machines, refrigerators, light bulbs, antibiotics, mobile phones and so on.

AI is pseudoscience, just like psychology and biology. Some people think we understand them and can apply them but in reality we don't.

>>68359 Yup. My life would be changed a lot more if my landlord installed a dishwasher than if my landlord joined the singularity.

>>68359 Unironically the things that made women useless. Women can't cook, sew, wash clothes, process food, or raise children and technology is the reason they can leave the kitchen and not have to do any of these things.

>>68366 >neurosuggesting you can cook, sew, wash clothes, process food, or raise children

>>68370 Not that lainon, but I actually can and do all of those things and not a single one of them are difficult.

>>68371 on the other hand, do you make milk ?

>>68371 >i actually can change diapers and wash my clothes and none of those things are difficult

>>68366 What makes them useless? They can leave the house to participate in the job market.

>>68166 Full Assimilation Human Irrelevancy Unconditional Acceleration

>>68385 >whigghoid npc cattle route: >all tech requires moding in like a web browser where you cant just view data (json) you have to execute the data (javascript/css) >sockets mode in your NIC >vpn modes in your OS/NIC >VR/AR will require moding in your brain when it finally works >cars are just a bunch of unnecessary soykaf (infotainment, ecu, canbus and networks of aids garbage like tire pressure sensors etc) moded into a cell tower and wifi, instead of a motor and steering wheel you chose this future for yourselves