> If AI gets so good that it can replace all human labor, will capital like money and data centers be the only moat left?
If AI gets good enough to replace all human labor then actual physical moats to keep the hungry, rioting replaced humans away will be the most important moats.
When AI dooms humanity it probably won't be because of the sort of malignant misalignment people worry about, but rather just some silly logic blunder combined with the system being directly in control of something it shouldn't have been given control over.
I think we have less to worry about from a future SkyNet-like AGI system than we do just a modern or near future LLM with all of its limitations making a very bad oopsie with significant real-world consequences because it was allowed to control a system capable of real-world damage.
I would have probably worried about this situation less in times past when I believed there were adults making these decisions and the "Secretary of War" of the US wasn't someone known primarily as an ego-driven TV host with a drinking problem.
> But if we did use it (which I have no intention of doing), it would start being more reasonable.
It would start being more "relevant" but not necessarily more reasonable.
I hadn't used Facebook regularly in many years but recently posted a story about the passing of my 18 year old cat. I did this as a way of informing friends and family I don't communicate with on a constant basis that I was going through a bad time (I was very fond of my cat).
My Facebook algorithm is now just almost entirely a solid wall of people I don't know announcing the death of their cat. A non-stop parade of personal tragedies.
I can see the connection of how one thing led to the other but it also highlights how clumsy and soulless these algorithmic systems are.
When AI dooms humanity it probably won't be because of the sort of malignant misalignment people worry about, but rather just some silly logic blunder combined with the system being directly in control of something it shouldn't have been given control over.
> It's quite amazing watching the "climate change isn't real" folks transition to "climate change is no big deal", then to "climate change is too hard/expensive to deal with".
At the top level (of government and corporate entities) those people always knew it was real, the messaging just changed as it became harder to keep a straight face while parroting the previous message in the face of overwhelming empirical evidence.
Exxon's (internal) research in the 1970s has been very accurate to the observed reality since then.
They just didn't care that it was real because they valued profits/power/etc in the moment over some difficult to quantify (but certainly not good) future calamity.
You would think they would care at least in the cases where they had children and grandchildren who will someday have to really reckon with the outcome, but you'd be wrong, they (still) don't give a shit.
Whether or not it is a good plan depends upon how much faith they have in their doomsday bunkers and robot armies to protect them from the masses during the transition.
> I’m young so that’s probably part of it, only ~12 years into my career and haven’t experienced too many world defining shifts.
I'm old (52) and a bit AI hysterical despite being well aware of the reasons I supposedly shouldn't be (variations of Jevon's Paradox, the fact that we've had similar disruptions before, etc).
I can't help but think that both the speed and massive breadth of the AI disruption across so many industries all at once makes this a very different risk than anything we've experienced before, in my lifetime or before it.
It also doesn't help that at least here in the US this is all occurring when our government is both openly corrupt and particularly dysfunctional at solving any of the real-world problems facing its own citizens.
> If he has the license then yea it's legal. Chances are if he's posted it publicly he has the rights. Also for a low level personal website that's not going to get a lot of traffic and only hosting 3 songs they probably gave him a license for free.
Incredibly unlikely.
"Dance Yrself Clean" is owned by Warner Music Group, "Come On Eileen" is owned by Universal Music Group.
Both are highly litigious, extremely rights-protective and not in the habit of licensing music for free.
It is far more likely the person who put the site up just YOLO'd it and is hoping they never notice.
China is absolutely crushing everyone mostly across the board in technology these days. It's comical today, but will just be embarrassing soon.
The only bit visually we see China a little behind is AI but I suspect they have much better closed/unreleased models, and the fab/chip space, but they'll close that gap in a short few years I'd expect.
This is amazing! I WISH somebody would take 15 seconds of this clip, add China flag in the bottom, then add scratching sounds of a vinyl disc and forward to this, with Felon Musk/American flag:
Could not care less what Garry Tan's opinion of MacKenzie Scott’s charity work is.
Even if every penny she gave away did zero good and was just to spite Bezos, I'd still respect her far more than any of the tech oligarchs who are actively making the world worse just to see their own personal net wealth number go up.
If AI gets good enough to replace all human labor then actual physical moats to keep the hungry, rioting replaced humans away will be the most important moats.
reply