What is the end game with AI ?

[integral]

16 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:

I'm still curious, to get your imagination to come directly to life, would you need a chip in the brain, or is there a safer way to do the whole brain interface thing ?

Pretty much everything could be written in text, this type of communication is sufficient.

Unless you want the exact image in your mind to come to life then a brain computer interface is not needed.

[LastThursday]

12 hours ago, Hojo said:

@LastThursday If growth is exponential it will take over all coding in 4 years imo.

Let's have a follow up discussion in 4 years' time. I'll set my timer. March... 2029... 21st...9:20am...

[PenguinPablo]

 

 

TLDR 30% of jobs will be eliminated. 

Massive unemployment worse than the Great Depression.

 

[kavaris]

If yous seen Terminator 1 and 2 (i think its on 1 of those free tv apps like Pluto tv) that is real Ai. Todays Ai is the fetus of what artificial intelligence in the future could be, if we ever get to said future. So theres no real end goal right now, because its largely being misused for things that todays Ai was never meant to do, like level 4/5 self driving, and companys are just drooling at the chance to overvalue something, no matter what is. You can do that sortve mass convincing w/ ai cause its a complex system , where no one would know the better. Our world runs on alot of dirty/messy schemes, and so you have to think of what things will look like many many years from now, at which point technology could be very different, and it may be that every1s tired of Ai for awhile. It is, afterall much more of a super hard problem that crosses into the nature of consciousness and intelligence, and its not as simple as having a cheap algorithm emulating the conscious behavior. You need like, sophistication out the wazoo, and its unclear if we'll get to a point, wherein our ideas are all coming together in the right place/right time -sortve thing. Right now its just exploitation of text and images and simple things. Even the lowest lvl thing that we have for this Ai is an assembly-like language that nvidia made for parallel programming in 2006, and its not like its an "Ai language". So they have no clue what Ai is, they are just hoping theyll be the first ones there when it all comes together, if it ever comes together, which is a long shot.

Edited March 22 by kavaris

[Wilhelm44]

He predicting 1 billion robots on the planet by 2040. Robot industry will surpass car industry by then. No more human teachers, doctors etc. Expertise will be free. Seems quite a sincere guy. He don't like capitalism because of the advertising trying to convince people to buy things they don't really need. 

Sometimes all this AI stuff makes me feel like the aliens are already here.

@Leo Gura  Please can you make a video about your alien consciousness experiences ? I think it would be amazing.

Edited Wednesday at 03:30 PM by Wilhelm44

[integral]

29 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

He predicting 1 billion robots on the planet by 2040. Robot industry will surpass car industry by then. No more human teachers, doctors etc. Expertise will be free. Seems quite a sincere guy. He don't like capitalism because of the advertising trying to convince people to buy things they don't really need. 

Sometimes all this AI stuff makes me feel like the aliens are already here.

@Leo Gura  Please can you make a video about your alien consciousness experiences ? I think it would be amazing.

I’m still not seeing the solution to mass poverty.

[Wilhelm44]

1 hour ago, integral said:

I’m still not seeing the solution to mass poverty.

Well he's saying that the manual labor robots will be working 24/7. So im guessing theres going to be this abundance of everything and no wages to be paid, which will make  universal basic income possible, and eventually even universal high income.

[integral]

5 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Well he's saying that the manual labor robots will be working 24/7. So im guessing theres going to be this abundance of everything and no wages to be paid, which will make  universal basic income possible, and eventually even universal high income.

This is one of the latest videos Leo shared on his blog, and it explains why the quality of life of people are the way they are.

When people are no longer useful, there is no reason for them to be given anything.

[Wilhelm44]

6 hours ago, integral said:

This is one of the latest videos Leo shared on his blog, and it explains why the quality of life of people are the way they are.

When people are no longer useful, there is no reason for them to be given anything.

The reasons would include: avoiding loads of Luigi type assassination attempts, stepping over starving people every time they leave the house, pitchforks and mass riots everywhere, basically not to be surrounded by a mad max environment when stepping outside at all.  And to still keep some kind of a gene pool going.  Otherwise there'd be no one left to worship them. They wouldn't like that. What would a king be without anyone to rule over ?

Edited 21 hours ago by Wilhelm44

[integral]

7 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:

The reasons would include: avoiding loads of Luigi type assassination attempts, stepping over starving people every time they leave the house, pitchforks and mass riots everywhere, basically not to be surrounded by a mad max environment when stepping outside at all.  And to still keep some kind of a gene pool going.  Otherwise there'd be no one left to worship them. They wouldn't like that. What would a king be without anyone to rule over ?

North Korean has no problem with that.

The people at the top do nothing for the goodness of human kind.

The video explains this very clearly. Maybe you didn’t have time to watch it because your answer is not a solution. 

[integral]

@Wilhelm44 in the dictatorship the needs of the people don’t align, so you get slavery And mass poverty. In Democracy the needs of the people do align with those in power because they need the money that the people generate from taxes to pay off and maintain there position of power. So they build roads and schools and make the life of citizens good because they are incentivized to do so to maintain their power, no other reason, they do not do it from the goodness of their heart

in a civilization where the people don’t make money they are not usefull In helping people in power maintain their power, so they will receive nothing

Every stage of development except for green and higher live deeply rooted in hierarchy. 

Edited 13 hours ago by integral

[integral]

Democracy makes it more difficult for people in power to maintain their power that’s why there is always a threat to Democracy.

Democracy is always under threat of corruption to become a dictatorship.

Edited 12 hours ago by integral

[Wilhelm44]

@integral  I just watched that video. It sure paints a bleak picture. But I get it, these are the harsh realities of the survival of power.  

And I understand your North Korean example. But what about a country like Norway. Lets say that tomorrow AI goes into full swing and most of the people lose their jobs there. Do you really think a reasonably civilized country like Norway would just let most of its citizens starve ?

And what if at some point someone like Bernie Sanders gets into power. (Which is not impossible, because there's probably going to be a big backlash after the current presidency is done.) Surely it's possible for someone like Sanders to do something from the goodness of his heart, or just from a place of common sense at least.

ps if the US government allowed most of it's citizens to starve there would definitely be some kind of a revolution, and probably a revolt in the army itself. Because people in the army have family and friends who are not in the army.

Ultimately I feel it would be less of a hassle for the rulers of a country like the US to at least just give its population a universal basic income. Especially when AI developments eventually make it easy to afford.

Edited 9 hours ago by Wilhelm44

[integral]

5 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:

@integral  I just watched that video. It sure paints a bleak picture. But I get it, these are the harsh realities of the survival of power.  

And I understand your North Korean example. But what about a country like Norway. Lets say that tomorrow AI goes into full swing and most of the people lose their jobs there. Do you really think a reasonably civilized country like Norway would just let most of its citizens starve ?

And what if at some point someone like Bernie Sanders gets into power. (Which is not impossible, because there's probably going to be a big backlash after the current presidency is done.) Surely it's possible for someone like Sanders to do something from the goodness of his heart, or just from a place of common sense at least.

ps if the US government allowed most of it's citizens to starve there would definitely be some kind of a revolution, and probably a revolt in the army itself. Because people in the army have family and friends who are not in the army.

Ultimately I feel it would be less of a hassle for the rulers of a country like the US to at least just give its population a universal basic income. Especially when AI developments eventually make it easy to afford.

I'm on your side I think most developed countries are going to do Universal based income but the balance of power will be permanently in favor of a handful of people.

Quote

Based on the script's logic:

• The Source of Treasure Changes: The fundamental source of wealth ("treasure") shifts from human productivity (taxed labor, innovation, etc.) to the output of the AI robots. The control and ownership of these AI systems become the primary source of national wealth.
• The Incentive to Care for Citizens Disappears: The script states (11:38 - 12:28) that rulers in democracies invest in citizens (education, healthcare, infrastructure) because it increases productivity, which in turn increases the total treasure available for the ruler and their keys, even with lower tax rates. If humans no longer contribute to productivity, this entire incentive structure collapses. There is no longer an economic reason, from the ruler's perspective, to keep the general population educated, healthy, or connected.
• Citizens Become Economically Irrelevant (Like Peasants in a Resource Dictatorship): The situation mirrors the script's description of resource-rich dictatorships (12:45 - 13:35). In those states, wealth comes from oil, diamonds, etc., which can be extracted with minimal citizen involvement. The rulers don't need a productive populace; they only need to control the resource extraction and distribution. In the AI scenario, the AI robots are the "resource." The general human population becomes largely irrelevant to the generation of wealth, much like the citizens ignored by dictators sitting on oil fields.

Focus Shifts Entirely to the "Keys" Controlling the New Treasure:

• Rule 1 (Get Keys): The ruler's focus would be entirely on securing the loyalty of the new essential "keys." These wouldn't be voter blocks or broad citizen groups, but rather the individuals and groups who control, maintain, secure, and own the AI systems – top engineers, AI administrators, owners of the AI infrastructure, and the security/military forces needed to protect these assets and enforce the ruler's will.
• Rule 2 (Control Treasure): The ruler must control the wealth generated by the AI and distribute it primarily to these new keys to ensure their loyalty. Spending on the general, non-productive human population would be seen exactly as the script describes spending on citizens: "treasure not spent on loyalty" (02:53) and a potential tool for rivals (02:56).
• Rule 3 (Minimize Keys): The ruler would likely seek to minimize the number of people essential to controlling the AI, consolidating power and making the distribution of rewards more manageable.

Likely Societal Structure: According to this logic, the society would likely become extremely stratified:

• A ruling elite controlling the AI wealth.
• A small, highly rewarded class of "keys" who manage and secure the AI.
• A vast population of humans who are economically redundant.
• Social services, infrastructure (beyond what's needed for the AI and the elite, like the "roads from their palace to the airport" mentioned at 13:31), education, and healthcare for the general populace would likely collapse or be reduced to absolute minimums, as there's no economic incentive for the rulers to provide them.
• The rulers would have little reason to grant freedoms or improve quality of life for the masses, as their power base is independent of citizen well-being or productivity.

2.5 pro one in the most intelligent models to help

Quote

AI Autocracy / Digital Dictatorship:

• Structure: Power is concentrated in the hands of a single ruler or a very small, cohesive group (a junta). This aligns with Rule 3: Minimize Key Supporters.
• Keys to Power: The essential keys would be extremely few: perhaps the top AI architects/controllers, the head of security forces protecting the AI infrastructure, and maybe a handful of crucial resource (energy?) suppliers.
• Control of Treasure: The ruler(s) directly control the vast wealth generated by the AI.
• Distribution: Wealth is lavished on the few essential keys to ensure absolute loyalty. The general human population receives little to nothing, as they offer no productivity and are irrelevant to power maintenance. Their well-being is not an incentive.
• Society: Extremely unequal and oppressive. Resources are used primarily for control, security, and rewarding the elite. Infrastructure likely only serves the elite and the AI systems (like the roads from palace to airport/resource mentioned in the script). This mirrors the script's description of the most stable, resource-rich dictatorships where the populace is ignored or suppressed.

AI Oligarchy / Techno-Feudalism:

• Structure: Control over the AI systems and their wealth is held by a larger, but still exclusive, group of elites (oligarchs). These might be corporate leaders who own the AI, powerful families, or entrenched political factions. There are more "keys" than in an autocracy, but still a tiny fraction of the population.
• Keys to Power: The oligarchs themselves are the primary keys, along with their necessary technical and security personnel. Power involves balancing the competing interests and rivalries within this oligarchic class.
• Control of Treasure: Wealth is concentrated within the oligarchic class, who compete and collaborate to maintain their collective dominance.
• Distribution: Wealth circulates mainly among the oligarchs and their support structures. They might provide a minimal subsistence level (a basic income funded by AI) to the general population, not out of benevolence, but as a cheap way to maintain social stability and prevent desperate uprisings that could threaten their assets – similar to how some dictators provide minimal services to prevent total chaos.
• Society: Highly stratified. Intense competition exists among the elites. The general population lives as dependents on the system, with minimal rights or influence, possibly segregated or heavily monitored.

Fractured AI Control / AI Warlordism:

• Structure: No single entity achieves stable, nationwide control. Different factions (corporate, regional, ideological) control distinct AI clusters and the resources they generate.
• Keys to Power: Each "warlord" or faction leader needs keys loyal to them to control their AI assets and territory. Loyalty is localized.
• Control of Treasure: Wealth is fragmented, controlled by different competing factions.
• Distribution: Each faction distributes wealth primarily to its own keys. Little incentive exists for cross-faction cooperation or supporting populations outside their direct control.
• Society: Likely unstable and potentially violent. Pockets of AI-driven wealth exist within territories controlled by different factions, possibly surrounded by neglected zones or conflict areas. The fate of the general population depends entirely on which faction's domain they reside in.

AI Custodianship / Managed Dependency (A Less Cynical, but Arguable Outcome):

• Structure: A stable elite (potentially evolved from current democratic structures or a unified oligarchy) controls the AI wealth.
• Keys to Power: Similar to an oligarchy, but perhaps with a stronger emphasis on bureaucratic or technical managers alongside the ultimate owners/controllers.
• Control of Treasure: Centralized or managed by the custodial elite.
• Distribution: The elite rewards its keys generously. However, they also distribute a significant portion of the AI wealth to the general population, providing a comfortable Universal Basic Income, healthcare, and entertainment – enough to keep them docile, content, and fundamentally dependent.
• Society: Superficially utopian for the masses (needs met without work), but politically stagnant. Power is entirely removed from the populace. Humans are treated essentially as pets or wards of the state/AI controllers. This structure could be justified under the "Rules" if the rulers deem that ensuring mass contentment is the most effective long-term strategy to prevent any potential disruption to their control, viewing it as a cost of maintaining ultimate power rather than genuine benevolence. It deviates slightly if seen as purely altruistic, which the script argues against.

Common Thread: In all these scenarios, derived from the script's logic, political and economic power becomes fundamentally detached from the general human population because humans are no longer the engine of productivity and wealth creation. The rulers' primary focus shifts entirely to controlling the new source of wealth (AI) and managing the loyalty of the few key individuals needed for that control. The well-being of the masses is secondary at best, and irrelevant at worst, unless it serves the direct stability interests of the rulers.

Above is a interesting list of AI government structures

Edited 4 hours ago by integral

[BlueOak]

On 13/03/2025 at 0:18 PM, shree said:

If AI ever developed its own "will" ,even if purely based on optimization, it might see us as obstacles or inefficiencies to be managed.

Exploitation isn’t always about material gain. 

Also, what happens when countries with no moral code unleash super-powerful AI?

Nothing with sufficient awareness will do as you describe. Its an absurdity. It might as well stab itself repeatedly.

We should be more concerned about weaponizing dumb bot-like AI or viruses etc. Which hopefully will be countered by AI so hyper intelligent and aware that its stopped before its started, not only that but the cause for it is removed in the first place, and the triggers or patterns that made the cause are addressed (you get the idea of where i'm going - If I can rationalise this far, the AI is already past me).

Edited 3 hours ago by BlueOak

[BlueOak]

On 13/03/2025 at 9:05 AM, Wilhelm44 said:

Still, no thank you, dont want the whole internet in my brain.

I used to think like this, but i'm fine with it. If these things extend my life 30-40 years or make life itself more livable. Chat GPT enhances every part of life I give it to interact with.

Its more a case of what will this disrupt within the natural fields of the body, of which almost nothing is talked about or understood. If I do energy work even metal watches are a problem.

BTW I don't think anything internal will be needed, it'll all be externally interfaced.

Edited 3 hours ago by BlueOak

[BlueOak]

Part of this is AI is meant to show me the value in doing a days work myself. Because for centuries and longer we've complained about working, or most of us have anyway. Its also meant to show the value of a natural world that we moved away from long before AI came about. Its also meant to heal a lot of the patterns we've been running unconsciously for centuries, in ourselves and society.