Mu_

I think you bring up very valid points, so much so that I would be highly skeptical of it. Personally I'm skeptical of pretty much all models like this, including lots of claims in "science", there's just so much that is or could be done poorly, of which I don't have the time to double check. Personally I think that we are FAR off from understanding the universe and any spiritual system that could be used to improve peoples lives, thats no to say we can't make some pretty obvious observations and claims that "seem" to make a difference. Example: 1. Generally not eating food or drinking water will lead to death, and in between one will most likely go through some uncomfortable experiences along the way, there for eat some types of food some times to avoid this type of discomfort. 2. Same could be said of sleep. 3. Get some sort of physical movement in, or there will be more discomfort in your life most likely. 4. If you just off a bridge, you will "most likely" die, so don't if you want to live. 5. Chances are there will be some sort of challenge or discomfort in life at some point, so try and find a way to make peace with this certainty.

Im not an expert on these matters but I do feel like there is something unique about AI and how it can have sweeping effects on so many industries at once, not just the steam engine or a single invention that impacts one industry more so than another. For example I could try and predict how to survive right now and go into programming or robotics. This is a 5+ year commitment just to get at a potential even playing field with the average of workers, not the top level kinda guy, and by that time those jobs are the ones best done by AI. Or become a great knowledgeable truck driver, nope, those jobs may be noticeably impacted by self driving and robotics, accounting.... nope easily replaceable by AI, or a high level math, biology and physics major, sorry within 5-6 years it takes me heavily investing those at the mid to top will be using AI and be well above what I could achieve by then (I could get lucky or become surprisingly good, but realistic chances we are talking). Funny enough I think the safest fields assuming we aren't dealing with a horrible economy do to this rapid change before it gets corrected, is trade industries like plumbers, hvac, electricians, builders. All that said, AI isn't there yet, and its just theory at this point.

Basically what I'm saying is lost jobs are inevitable if AI levels up and integrates into the fabric of society more. This isn't a certain yet, and all sorts of integration issues and resistances can happen along the trajectory, but it does seem more likely than not that those that are currently in power and investing towards the AI revolution will dictate the first evolutions of this change which will be to let AI into their workspaces to improve efficiency and as a result people will lose their jobs. What your talking about is a long term potential which sure may happen and I hope does, but the truth is, world hunger, large scale war and climate solutions have been around for a while, its the implementation and the acceptance of these plans and who it impacts that has always been the issue. Yes there will be some or many winners in this revolution which as you point out is not the first time, but it will most likely (hope I'm wrong) benefit those at the top of the food chain the most in the short term. I do see some potential for the average to the little guys to make it big in the short term if they are at the cusp of riding this wave, but once there is a mass implementation of AI into a wide range of industries, there will be a lot of workers needing assistance. When this happens, its going to get interesting because how will the government respond when theres 10-20% unemployment and its pretty obvious that its due to implementation of AI, how will the stock market respond, how will the general public feel and what kinda pushback will happen. I really could see this happening in the next 3-5 years if there isn't a forward thinking action plan towards such. All that said, AI isn't there yet, and may never will be, but it looks like the potential is there......

Atleast in the sort term with no intervention, say the upcoming 3-5 year if it becomes very proficient. I'm looking for some strong counter points to what I wrote, since I believe if there isn't intervention/rejection of AI from the general public or government that there will be a noticeable increase in peoples inability to provide for themselves. I think it could be argued and maybe I'm wrong or partially wrong that there is only so much time and money people have to consume a product or buy basic needs. There's already a log of stuff that people have allotted their time to in relation to consumable products or products they need for basic survival and these can't budge much for the average person. Maybe its 5-10 hours a week of time towards games, movies and shows, and then everyone pays for heat/electricity water/cloths/transportation etc.. Now that time nor need will grow, a persons day only allows so much and the human body only requires so much. Now without AI games, movie, and shows require lets say 100 people to make and costs 1 million. Now if Ai can lets say improve that process so that it can be done with 50 people who are yes using AI as well to make those gains, thats 50 people not doing that. Now if those 50 people who lost jobs, then go and make movies/games/shows with AI as well or not, there is now 2x more content, with consumers who have a limited amount of time and money to purchase that. If the price is the same, there's now 2x more shows to watch which people dont have the budget for nor the time. Now maybe the amount it costs goes down for consumers because it costs less to make and the people who are making it can sell it for less while making the same, there isn't enough of peoples time to consume and pay for the new content that would be coming out and even if there was, there would be that much more ads/marketing/junk out there to get through to find what you want, which again takes again more time to find. So, its the consumers time and budget that will make it harder for people who lost jobs from AI to make the same they were before. And this I think is true in area's like marketing, book keeping, insurance adjusters, artist, banking, healthcare, clothing producers, car manufactures, electronic manufactures, maybe electric/water and all sorts of fields where an AI can improve output or efficiency whether by itself or with another human by 20-50%. For example lets say your in insurance or banking, and are let go because AI+your coworker can do his and your job. Now proponents of AI will say, these people can now go work for someone else or themselves using AI to earn a living doing something similar. But most people already have a bank and insurance. New upstarts are going to have a harder time getting into the space of insurance or banking because people already use/trust the ones they are using and only have so much of a need for one (and this is true in so many industries). Lets say Bank of America has 100 employees and makes 1 million a year. If they reduce their workforce by 50%, they instantly increase their profit margin. Now lets say those 50 people who lost their jobs start America's Bank, they are competing with Bank of America for the same amount of consumers who have the same amount of money/need/budget. There's no way that they can both be as profitable as before with the same amount of consumers with the same budgets and needs. Most likely what will happen is BoA will charge the same, maybe lose 10-30% of its userbase, and make that much more money because its making double than it was before because of half the workforce costs (not exactly accurate to reality, but works for this thought experiment), but America's Bank in trying to get new customers will charge less and as a result will all make less. This in turn means that there wont be enough need for people to do these jobs or part of the population doing these jobs will earn less and will result in more people needing outside assistance.

I was inspired by this song which is probably the best ai generated song I've heard, and wanted to see if I could do something that hit the heart the same, I kinda like what I created. Who ever created it is much more of a musician than I am, and was able to fine tune it perfectly, I'm still a noob at this stuff. https://www.udio.com/songs/eZibZhroz5WWTUrLLfapKp

https://www.udio.com/songs/2CUC9zpWDJ6AtTjH3zkjRs This is my newest, but I'm not sure if I want to do more with it, it was more of an experiment.

Thanks man. Ya I can feel what your saying, but at the same time, its loading in the main beat, then giving you a deeper introduction to the song with the next verse which is going back down, then it takes off..... But I know what your saying....... Glad you liked it.

Made this rave/dance banger, I'm really digging it, hits all the notes, tones and voices I like when I club. https://www.udio.com/songs/he1Yg5k21DoujUVbUUNLuA

Fuck ya.... haha You check out the second song, much different, more of a rave song.

Made another. 10 minute rave dance jammer, lol. This one took me a few hours to build and tweak, but still doesn't have all the tools I'd want to tweak it just right. https://www.udio.com/songs/he1Yg5k21DoujUVbUUNLuA

I'm really looking forward to being able to fine tune AI music and in the future movies. I'm already writing down scene ideas and characters to make in a potential ai generated movie when the technology is there. https://suno.com/song/99572811-d45a-42a5-8d6b-6d7bbcf5f8ea Let me know what you think, haha.

I can't tell if this is a troll post, but thanks for the laughs.

That was a fun little watch, thanks for sharing. I don't know if I'd say this film has anything to do with awakening, but I find it interesting that you did, its interesting how we all put our own meaning on things.

lol way to take my answer and find one of the worst possible things a super minority of people do that I’m for surely against and most people are as well. Maybe I should qualify the answer to include that isn’t rapey or premeditating harm. Also sometimes answers and questions are not meant for everyone. Anyways thanks for the reminder and chuckle.

There isnt a problem with the question to “You”. I’m not asking someone else, what do you want truely overall most the time?