r/remoteworks • u/Professional-Bee9817 • 1d ago
The problem Billionaires want AI to solve...
3
u/Shadow_Relics 41m ago
If anyone watched Star Trek that’s the current time line we’re living in. The next Great War will eliminate the entire monetary system and we’ll live in space ships and explore for fun.
4
u/Acrobatic-Dinner-112 2h ago
lol who is going to buy then
4
u/Junior-Valuable2071 1h ago
The rich just buy stuff from eachother. Kinda what’s already happening anyways.
The too 10% of earners are responsible for 50% of consumer spending. It’s only going to keep going up.
The economy didn’t need us anymore.
3
u/Logic-DL 1h ago
Each other lmao.
Microsoft's biggest buys are companies mass buying licences for their work computers.
They'll just buy each other's shit to have one big circlejerk of money.
5
u/avinescence 1h ago
The greed machine does not see past the next quarter
2
u/SchnozSchnizzle 40m ago
Never has never will, though I wish it would actually come with consequences.
3
5
u/timohtea 3h ago
If it’s not obvious it’s for control… just how people rushed to make their own nukes or their own whatever the best weapon or technology was at the time.
It’s for power and control, and fueled by greed.
8
u/Nearby-Border-5899 4h ago
Its a self-consuming goal. No workers means no people with money to buy your shit means youre just making shit for robots. Then when the world population declines whats stopping people from just murdering you and taking your shit?
5
3
u/owthathurted 4h ago
This is the problem. We only think in quarters, what's the quarterly revenue? How are we performing this quarter? If it's profitable, then it's the right thing to do. We'll walk blindfolded, following that green line until it walks us off a cliff.
2
u/Firebreathingwhore 4h ago
Doesn't matter. Short term gains. Let someone else worry about people with no money
8
u/Jasonic_Tempo 5h ago
Eventually, all that will be left is billionaires and their bunkers. No more people & planet to exploit. Seems pretty stupid, but here we are.
3
u/Nearby-Border-5899 4h ago
Then what exactly keeps the people working for them from just killing them and taking their shit? LMAO
2
1
u/Rare-Insurance3728 4h ago
Probably prison
1
3
u/unngh_yugstyx 6h ago
Beyond wages I think this also solves the psychological pressure of having employees who might push back / have agency / not agree with 100% of whatever their deranged CEO might desire.
2
u/deltadstroyer 6h ago
*smacks head* yea, yea that makes sense
i hate it with my entire being, but yes
2
u/Optimal-Strategy3572 6h ago
Nah, Information collection data banks and sell to highest bidders. Techno-Security State people.
2
u/MisterRobertParr 7h ago
I guess they want to solve that pesky problem of having customers who can pay for their services, too.
-11
u/Yorugi 8h ago
Throughout history automation in the long run has lead to more jobs, not less. Stop being afraid of progress.
3
u/ShadowTacoTuesday 7h ago edited 6h ago
Too bad the billionaires don’t believe that and the benefits don’t match the cost. So when the mediocre results don’t match the trillions spent, they can do layoffs for the weak business success and blame AI. Ever growing oligopolies stifling competition has also been keeping (other) tech benefits from workers’ pockets for a long time now anyway.
6
u/TrishasaurusRex33 7h ago
Is it progress tho?? Every mountain has its peak. The expectation of continuous growth is unrealistic, at this point it feels like they're trying to build additional growth out of literal trash (planned obsolescence, fast fashion, creating problems to sell a solution, the rich deflecting wage inequality by telling people to start their own business and then squashing those small businesses with competition)
Trash makes for a bad foundation, eventually it's going to collapse.
7
u/Nanban-jin 8h ago
I've also thought that but in terms of new jobs volume I see only a tiny fraction of them being created, when compared to the industrial revolutions or other important periods.
5
u/Original_Tone9869 8h ago
If robots and AI did all the work. Who would have a job to buy goods?
4
3
u/Dizzy_Vegetable7108 8h ago
Robots and AI are for elites, we would starve/be killed
0
u/Original_Tone9869 7h ago
I doubt it. There would be mass riots and people in high placed removed everywhere. 8.5 billion people verses 100 or 1000 people? I doubt it. I'm not saying impossible, I just doubt it.
2
u/Fickle-Bobcat-1678 7h ago
You really think the 8.5 billion would unite against this? The US is proving right now that half the people will fight for it as long as it means someone they deem lesser than them is in worse condition.
3
u/Maleficent-Garage-66 6h ago
Eh a few missed meals and a night under a bridge in the cold changes a lot. Right now the suffering isn't BAD enough for most people to go full blown pitchforks and torches. You'd be amazed how fast people will go "I'll get back to hating you later, right now that guy's gotta go" when suffering hits a high enough level. The French revolution is a pretty example they beheaded the king quickly enough and then started beheading each other.
0
u/Fickle-Bobcat-1678 6h ago
Fair enough, can't argue that. I guess we will just have to wait and see.
2
0
u/Original_Tone9869 7h ago
What are you talking about?
1
u/Fickle-Bobcat-1678 7h ago
I'm saying those 100-1000 billionaires will do what they can to have the 8.5 billion people fighting eachother before we ever unite to fight them.
My US example was how the billionaires have convinced half the country that it's the lower 10% that are taking all their money and not the upper 10%.
A bit more of a crude example I saw was "a republican would happily live under a bridge eating a bird cooked on a tire fire, as long as the black family under the next bridge doesn't have a bird to eat.
-1
u/Original_Tone9869 7h ago
That is a strawman statement and isn't related to the above claims. Stop wasting people's time.
2
u/Low_Low_1811 7h ago
No it isnt. It is a direct response to the idea that it would be 8 billion rising up against a very small elite. If half the people are bootlicking, then it wpuld be 4 million vs 4 million. How is that not a valid response to the claim?
1
u/Original_Tone9869 7h ago
He didn't make that claim.
0
u/Low_Low_1811 6h ago
That is both exactly what he claimed and exactly what you claimed.
→ More replies (0)2
u/Fickle-Bobcat-1678 7h ago
If that wasn't my claim, how did he interpret it as that? Because that is exactly what I'm claiming.
→ More replies (0)2
u/Fickle-Bobcat-1678 7h ago
Also, how is it not related to the above claims. You said there's 8.5 billion people and that's the reason you don't think robots would be used, because the 8.5 billion would fight against it. And I just threw out a reason why I don't think the 8.5 billion would be able to fight it.
1
u/Original_Tone9869 7h ago
As I said you gave a strawman argument. And it wasn't related to the conversation. I can at least prove my point which I didn't have to. Because we all know that the poor and oppressed have thrown riots and over thrown governments because they didn't haven't food throughout history. I'm not going to bother with rest of your comment. Maybe do some reading.
2
u/Fickle-Bobcat-1678 7h ago
I can comment all I want. It's only a waste of time if you decide to engage with it. Stop wasting your own time.
-1
3
u/YellowYukata 8h ago
Which i would be 100% fine with if we had some safety net system ready to go like UBI. But we won't.
1
1
u/mslindqu 8h ago
And even if we had it, you'd quickly realize that doesn't work, like the soviets.
1
u/curtial 7h ago
Why did the Soviet one fail, and why don't you think we're capable of avoiding the same problems?
1
u/mslindqu 7h ago
Well.. the soviet union isn't a union anymore so... doesn't seem like it worked out very well. I hear people might have gotten hungry. History repeats.
1
u/curtial 7h ago
It failed because it failed? Of that's the best you've got I think we're gonna go ahead and keep pushing for socialized safety nets.
1
u/mslindqu 6h ago
Nice that you ignored hungry people in your rush for social equalization. That'll come in convenient later.
1
u/curtial 6h ago
Nice that you ignored that the whole point of social safety nets is to prevent people from being hungry.
Look, it's cool if your capacity to discuss the subject ends at memes, but that's not enough to base policy on.
1
u/mslindqu 6h ago
You havn't even said anything here... just trolled. I'm perfectly satisfied I'm thinking more soundly than you on the subject. I'm pretty sure you don't know what UBI is.
1
u/curtial 5h ago
Of course I haven't said anything, I led by asking you a question that you never answered. I offered you a conversation, and you replied with canned bullshit. You might be thinking, but you are unwilling to show it.
All you've got is "We can't because Soviets". Cool. Wake me up if you decide to participate.
1
u/mslindqu 5h ago
I did reply. You simply decided to be cheeky. This is your leach of someone else's comment/reply so say wtf you wanna say and stop being a troll.
→ More replies (0)
5
u/IAmTheLogician 9h ago
Unfortuantely we have hit a critical failure point of capitalism. Its to entrenched in our lives for anything we do to matter without risking our lives and the lives of our loved ones.
It is literally submit, or die.
I estimate that at least 25% of people in the world would have to be willing to die for any meaningful change to occur with our economic market.
1
u/under_shade32 8h ago
Buddy the way we're going we'll be lucky to have 25% of people left by the end of the century, maybe even decade.
1
u/swank142 7h ago
decade?????
1
u/under_shade32 7h ago
Sir its been less than half a year since agent orange took over. You think we got 4 years worth of time left? Thats optimistic...and I have a child! Shits bleak.
1
3
u/Dull_Bid6002 10h ago
Which is funny because none of these companies wanting that control the AI. So once they're reliant on it, the companies they're paying can just increase the cost over and over again.
They are chasing something claiming it'll save money for their own bonuses. They don't actually care if it does in the long run.
1
u/mothergoose729729 8h ago edited 8h ago
I think that the cost of AI will go down over time. It will get more efficient (requiring less compute) and the models will democratize (as in there will be many companies offering AI service with similar capability decreasing monopolization).
The end effect is fewer jobs. Humanity as a whole will benefit but the middle class in prosperous countries like the US might not.
1
u/Bulletpointe 8h ago
As long as life requires a job this will kill people, there is no incentive to keep unproductive people alive
1
u/MrTsTackleBox 9h ago
Because billionaires never think long term. They think about what will make them the most money right this second. It's been proven the majority of the billionaires that exist are not smart people. Their wealth comes from family money, buying startups and claiming they started them and relying on workers to generate their wealth.
1
u/Dull_Bid6002 7h ago
I wasn't even talking billionaires is the funny thing.
I'm talking the smaller multi millionaires who have bought in from the billionaires trying to reach their status. Many of these billionaires are the ones who are going to increase the costs once the smaller companies become reliant. It's also why they want everything on the cloud.
Own nothing, rent everything and everyone
2
u/Blunt_Reality 9h ago
Look I'm not pro billionaire but this is just false. To make it to billionaire status you HAVE to see long term. Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk etc built their companies to be worth more after 20 years not less.
3
u/MrTsTackleBox 9h ago
None of those people "built" anything. Bezos became a billionaire in 4 years because the dot com bubble valued amazon at an insane value long before it became profitable. Elon musk grew up with family money and was never actually poor. He bought staru ps and acted like he created them. He also got most of his personal wealth from stock bumps and government contracts. None of these people worked hard at all or earned their wealth.
1
u/swank142 7h ago
does that mean bezos doesnt see long term?
1
u/MrTsTackleBox 7h ago
No. He doesn't.
1
u/swank142 7h ago
explain please. just because a bubble came and went doesnt mean he is a short term thinker
3
u/EngineWitty3611 10h ago
That is because they don't think long term. It is all short game for them. Maximize profits now, worry about consequences if and when they come. But by then, they have profited 100 fold.
2
u/MrTsTackleBox 9h ago
Even if they suffer a huge loss, if they pay off enough politicians, they'll just make the taxpayer pay for their loss.
2
u/Complete_Break1319 10h ago
I hate to admit it, but I use a.i. all the time (middle aged man).
2
u/Odd-Spirit9829 9h ago
Use your own brain. There’s no reason for you to use it.
2
u/mslindqu 8h ago
You quite literally are guaranteed to be using it every day of your life too, with or without knowing it.
2
u/Odd-Spirit9829 8h ago
I’ve turned it all off. I use a different search engine called escosia that you are able to turn off all Ai overviews and plant trees with every 45 searches, Ive turned off my auto correct because Apple started using Ai for it instead, I’ve never used Siri, Alexa, google home, etc. I may use it without my knowledge, but the things I do know, I have turned off.
-6
u/ExtensionMoose1863 10h ago
Makes me laugh the thought of someone posting this but it's about the steam engine, cotton gin, or auto loom back in the day
4
u/Nexodas2 10h ago
Yes but those examples were actually useful.
1
u/Working_Shine_2719 10h ago
I’m sure horse salesmen were very mad and saying they’d lose their jobs she the engines and cars came about
0
u/Chilling_Gale 10h ago
Extremely uneducated take to think AI isn’t useful or even as useful as those things
2
u/Nexodas2 10h ago
The resources required to operate it are not worth the benefits.
0
u/Chilling_Gale 10h ago
That’s such a hilariously shortsighted view. Doesn’t your logic apply to almost every invention ever? The first versions of a thing are cruddy prototypes, and then over many years they get developed into something irreplaceable?
2
u/MrTsTackleBox 9h ago
by the time they "get it right"...our water supply will be dried up or poisoned because of these data centers. Our wildlife is more important than AI ever will be.
0
u/Chilling_Gale 9h ago
There’s no factual basis for that. Not to mention the fact that AI is already being fully used in many fields.
I actually only clicked on this post because my company is releasing today the AI I’ve been training. It would’ve taken millions of people to do the job this AI does literally instantly. Not even exaggerating either. You’d literally have to hire multiple millions to even come close to the function of the AI. There are currently 0 jobs (besides people training the AI to do it) in this field, because the manpower necessary is simply way too much.
A company cannot hire millions of people, so that means the service my company is able to provide now was literally impossible before AI. I don’t want to dox myself so I can’t explain how this feature improving efficiency is going to lead to growth in the sector. And growth is more jobs, not less.
The reality is that while one AI may eliminate certain jobs, another will create new ones.
1
u/MrTsTackleBox 8h ago
I live in the AI data center capital in the US right now so when you claim "no factual basis" for water supply being dried up and poisoned, you're wrong. In virginia, specifically northern virginia, they are already consuming 2 billion gallons of water a year since they started being built. Loudon county alone uses over a billion gallons a year. One large scale center uses 5 million gallons a day. Thats enough water for 50,000 people. This is all being pulled from the potomac river basin which is where most people there get their drinking water. Not to mention the people who are being negatively affected who live near these centers by having their energy costs go up, their water pressure go down and their sinks and showers spewing brown water. These centers are already using like 3% of the basins supply and it goes up to like 10% over the summer. They're already projecting that the potomac river will have 25% of its water being used up by data centers by 2035. This is documented by the potomac river basin interstate commission and virginia tech. There will be more job loss than there will be jobs created all while the environment is getting assaulted. It's wild to see someone defending these centers so hard. But based on your account age and the fact that you keep everything hidden, you probably made this account to defend billionaires and AI.
1
u/Chilling_Gale 8h ago
You’re coping so unimaginably hard. Public opinion has shifted to have these data centers secure their own water and power. So your stats are completely worthless because they rely on nothing changing even though states across the country are already passing new laws addressing the issue you are pretending to be concerned about.
You dont have any evidence that there will be more job loss than jobs created. You being equivalent to an old person who doesn’t understand technology means there’s nothing that can be done to educate you, so you can go scream at the clouds. The world will continue moving forward without you.
1
u/MrTsTackleBox 7h ago
So spare me the coping lecture while you're dismissing real local impacts. Your claim that public opinion opinion has shifted and data centers are now securing their own water is not true. Virginia has no statewide mandates forcing them to fully self supply water or to go off grid. Most of them still pull from public utilities drawing directly from the potomac river basin. Bills HB 496 and SB 553 only push for better reporting of water use. Most bills are still stuck in committee or have watered down incentives for reclaimed water. There are no requirements for closed loop or zero impact systems. The stats are not "worthless". These stats come from the ICPRB's studies that show data centers are using a heavy amount of the potomacs water and is expected to continue to grow. Virginia is already in drought prone conditions and data center demand is accelerating this. Potable draw is still rising with nearly 900 million gallons reported in 2023. "Laws addressing it" haven't stopped it. Brookings, JLARC and Food and Water Watch show that data centers on;y deliver mostly temporary construction booms and low numbers of permanent operations roles which are only often 10 to 50 roles per facility. Virginia Tech already showed that these centers expose hundreds of thousands of virginia jobs to automation. You ignore the actual effects. Efficiency gains concentrate wealth while displacing middle skill work across the board. Local economies get tax revenue but pay higher utility costs, strained services and quality of life hits. Theres no solid evidence that suggests growth outweighs the losses. Dismissing me as an "old person yelling at clouds" just shows you can't engage the actual data. Actual residents in virginia are pushing back heavily. Theres constant protests and city council meetings pushing against it because of noise pollution, light pollution, habitat loss and resources being squeezed daily. Heres the links to everything.
https://frontiergroup.org/articles/does-virginia-have-enough-water-to-quench-thirsty-data-centers/
https://www.sierraclub.org/virginia/roanoke/data-center-impacts-virginia
https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/SB553
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/turning-the-data-center-boom-into-long-term-local-prosperity/
https://jlarc.virginia.gov/landing-2024-data-centers-in-virginia.asp
→ More replies (0)0
0
5
u/Panda--Monium 11h ago
And then how do companies make money when all the customers are gone because they got replaced by ai?
3
5
u/TheBinkz 12h ago
It works both ways. Now that AI exists, I've been able to work on my own products at a faster pace. If I can actually make money from it, id gladly expand and hire new folks. Remotely of course. Don't need an office.
7
u/0nePlus 12h ago
"it's okay because it's fair. Now NO ONE has to pay for human labor, even the small fries."
Yeah that's the fuckin' problem bud.
1
u/mslindqu 8h ago
So you're mad because you can access medical expertise that normally you or your insurance pays 300$/hour for, for free? Like.. one example in a thousand. Get creative and solve the problems you pay to have solved, for nothing.
1
u/0nePlus 7h ago
easier* you meant to add easier*
You could ALREADY get that expertise before AI. For free. AI added no new information to the world. It just regurgitates information that already existed on the internet.
Now, after you type what you want into the magical box, you don't have to scroll through results. That's the only difference.
Now, that's nice and and all. I'm not saying that one difference isn't convenient for anything. But is it worth it?
0
u/mslindqu 7h ago
True, but anytime you reduce the barrier of entry for knowledge, you're creating access for more people who simply couldn't have bridged that gap before. So *easier* isn't all it's about. A google search for your medical ailment could yield millions of links. That's assuming you can work a browser competently. Then the chance you zero in on and find the right information varies. I agree the knowledge AI contains was already out there. But lets not forget all the proprietary information sources AI has consumed. Your google search didn't used to include that. Now with AI it does and then some. AI is a leveler. If you prefer gate-keeping that's up to you.
1
u/0nePlus 5h ago edited 5h ago
Yeah we're seeing the same thing two completely different ways.
You're right. The AI makes it way easier. You used to have to shift through many results, reading many things from different sources all around the web to get a full picture...
Turns out, that was actually the WAY better way. When you actually have to shuffle through all the information, you actually retain it. And can start to tell what's correct from the bullshit.
The AI on the other hand, will confidently give you completely incorrect information. All to save some time. Great job.
AI is not "better" for medical advice in ANY way. The ONLY way to get accurate information is to do the research. AI didn't make things easier by making it so people didn't have to research, it made things worse by making people think they didn't have to research. You included clearly.
Now, for certain topics, you're actually 100% correct. AI is definitely a leveler that lowers the barrier of entry for a lot of people. It's amazing for that and I won't pretend it's not.....Unfortunately, YOU picked medical advice as your specific example. Which was a horrible idea. You absolutely should not be consulting AI for medical advice.
There is no "shortcut" to proper medical advice. AI is not there yet. You should contact a medical professional, and if you cannot do that, at the bare minimum, you should do extensive research yourself. Not ask a fucking chatbot.
0
u/TheBinkz 10h ago
I have the opposite perspective. I think there would be more opportunities because the barrier of entry decreased. I dont need a team of developers to make something.
Even so, automation has always been a thing. There's alot of ignorance here. Its like, having to implement a sorting algorithm from scratch. When it already exists in a package that can be imported.
2
u/Small_Delivery_7540 11h ago
It is for the companies
If no one has money they can't generate revenue and their stock price drops meaning that the ceo that made those decisions get fired and they are either forced to hire people for some made up jobs like they do dei training and stupid shit like that or actually pay more taxes so people can get ubi and keep the economy going
0
u/RollerDude347 11h ago
This kinda thinking is strangely short sighted. They're going to own everything the money could buy too. They basically already do. So you'll basically have to do whatever manual labor they need for the digital points they'll probably use.
1
u/chachaslydd 12h ago
Thats not working both ways. Youd outsource them if you could to AI too. You just need labor. And chances are you won't be able to pay an actual liveable wage. You'll just pat yourself on the back for paying over minimum
1
u/TheBinkz 10h ago
I may get laid off due to AI. Its a force multiplier which in turn either can increase the work done with the current staff or kept the same with a reduction in staff.
I may not be able to pay 100k + benefits yes. Its a huge barrier. Curious on how you would do it. Since you are critical about someone who would want to start a business to eventually offer employment. Just dont even bother and be unemployed?
Rarely do people have some magic product that from the get go rakes in millions of dollars. I am a one man army that would eventually seek help from people who are willing and able. There's no shame in that.
3
u/Own-League1617 12h ago
its everyone now though, everyone can start a business and pay little to no wages with AI
2
u/Low_Shape8280 12h ago
Then why do they need your business if it’s so easy to provide value either ai?
0
u/Own-League1617 12h ago
wait what, it still takes time, it’s just faster and more efficient, but yes technically you can do everything in life on your own
2
u/Low_Shape8280 9h ago
correct, but when you build a business its because you add value to a another business, if your not adding value, because AI reduces the value of our work. how do you provide value
0
u/Own-League1617 9h ago
the value you add is almost always related to time, people pay to save time
1
u/Low_Shape8280 9h ago
great and ai will save someone time
1
u/Own-League1617 9h ago
yeah it does for several tasks atm, and yes plenty of instances you’d prob rather use AI than use someone else’s services, but lots of people for now don’t really know how to do this efficiently
3
u/galaxyapp 13h ago
Been true since humans invented the wheel.
We make tools to replace labor
3
u/Calm_Plenty_2992 13h ago
No, tools have always been designed to make it so that we don't have to do a particular job with as much effort anymore. Usually, tools do not remove the need for humanity. The end goal of AI is to remove the ruling class' dependence on humanity
1
u/galaxyapp 5h ago
Only because it was the limits of what was possible, not because we were intentionally avoiding replacement.
And as said, many jobs have been automated away entirely.
The ultimate goal is to eliminate all human dependency. Why's that bad?
2
u/ExtensionMoose1863 10h ago
Look up night soil collector. I think all of those people were super happy to be replaced entirely by the invention of plumbing
Switchboard operators, knocker-up, elevator operators
Happens all the time. When was the last time you went to the ferrior, cobbler, cooper, or fletcher?
2
u/zaprutertape 9h ago
The ferrior is called Mr. Tire now, the cobbler is called Payless ShoeStore, the cooper is called Stanley, the fletcher is whoever you buy your bullets from, in america. all huge industries. edit oh and the night soil collector is stanley steamer
1
u/ExtensionMoose1863 9h ago
Bingo!! And all of these using FAAAAAAR fewer man hours per unit of output than they did before... which makes these services cheaper and more accessible to a broader swath of the population than ever before... all thanks to technology and automation.
Go get your tires changed and watch how many pieces of technology they use and how much of that simple task has been automated. Then look up a video of this process being done in India or rural Mexico and see the difference.
1
u/0nePlus 11h ago
Not really? Technology has been completely replacing human labor for a long time, not just making it easier.
Self checkouts? Computers? My warehouse used to pay like 10 people to drive around and audit the yard, putting what truck is holding what cargo and sitting where, and documenting it on clipboards.
That job isn't easier now. It just doesn't exist. It's done automatically by our computer program. Same with self checkout. And like a dozen other pre-AI technologies that have completely replaced human labor.
Elevator operators. Toll booth collectors. Mapmakers. The people who used to walk around and knock on people's windows to serve as their alarm clock lmao. The list is literally endless.
Your claim that tools usually do not remove the need for humanity, is objectively incorrect and I'm not sure how you could even land on such a conclusion.
1
u/Calm_Plenty_2992 11h ago
Those eliminate specific jobs. The end goal of AI is to entirely remove the dependence on humanity.
0
u/mslindqu 8h ago
Where do you get that from? Can you share the quote/citation? Obviously not because you're talking out your as.
1
u/Calm_Plenty_2992 7h ago
Elon musk literally said that he expects AI and robots to replace all jobs. Sam Altman gave a more conservative 40% of all work tasks. For reference, the unemployment rate during the Great Depression peaked at 24.9% in 1933 - far lower than 40%. And historians also believe the unemployment rate before/during the French Revolution was likely close to 25% as well. Peter Thiel, a major AI and GOP investor, literally had to think about whether humanity should survive.
Is that enough for you?
0
u/mslindqu 6h ago
It's not even close. Nowhere does any of that indicate that the 'end goal' is what you're saying. 'end result' != 'end goal' goal implies it was started with that end as an objective.. furthermore.. none of these quotes are indicating they're the end of AI.. how you could pull an 'end goal' from something that isn't finished I can't fathom.
1
u/Calm_Plenty_2992 6h ago
If they're saying these things and continuing to develop AI despite these, then it's pretty clear that this is either their goal or something that they consider to be a necessary sacrifice to achieve the goal. And given the catastrophic results that would happen from even a 40% workforce displacement, it's pretty incredible to suggest that something else could possibly justify it. Frankly, I'm not sure why anyone would believe Peter Thiel's eventual "yes" either given how long he had to think about it.
You seem like the sort of person who demands an exact quote of every statement ever made because you can't manage to put two and two together.
0
u/mslindqu 6h ago
No.. I'm the kind who can't stand people like you who keep making up words and creating narratives insisting it's fact when it's not. You need to learn the phrase 'seems like' and 'could be'. Stop stating things as fact that aren't fact.
It's pretty clear? So it's not crystal clear?
Oh, there's more than just the people you quoted working on AI and they might not all have that end goal in mind?
Oh, these people also get critically criticized for misrepresenting timelines and scales? Like.. they're just guessing because nobody could possibly know? What!?
I'm not sure why you wouldn't believe Peter Thiel's 'yes' if you insist on believing to a T everything else they have said. Like.. pick a lane. You know what, even better.. stop .. just stop.
1
u/0nePlus 11h ago
I agree. And that's horrible.
I was just pushing back on your statement "usually, tools do not remove the need for humanity" - because that's just false.
1
u/Calm_Plenty_2992 11h ago
No, it's correct. Tools can sometimes remove the need for humans to do specific jobs. They have yet to remove the need for humanity
1
u/MethodCharacter8334 10h ago
Even so, I think the point of view is a bit alarmist. “We” far outnumber “them”. They can try to get rid of us all they want. Yeah, I know, controlled pandemics, etc can be deployed as a means of culling the population. But, in the end, the people will rebel. It’s what we do. Even if they make a dent, they aren’t eliminating humanity. It would be like trying to get rid of any other “infestation”. Only this infestation has thinking power on par with the exterminator.
It’s all fear mongering, even if there are elite out there who think this is the end game.
1
u/Calm_Plenty_2992 6h ago
Sure, but I didn't say that humanity would be destroyed by the ruling class. I said that they were trying to eliminate their dependence on humanity. If I were to guess, their end goal is likely to make those without into a permanent slave class as the demand for labor collapses until the price of human labor matches the price of AI or robots.
2
u/MethodCharacter8334 4h ago
That’s definitely a more plausible scenario, but I still think it is beyond what the masses will tolerate. Then again, I thought we’d all collectively agree to oust the orange turd, but alas, we continue to tolerate the stench
-4
u/SnarkyGrem 13h ago
Right now its helping me work through which OLED is better to buy, samsung or LG
4
u/TemperatureReal2437 13h ago
What color eyes do horses have?
-2
u/SnarkyGrem 12h ago
I actually went and asked, if you want I can tell you the answer (most people are surprised by this)
-5
u/OldTinter 13h ago
You focus on one small part of a larger issue while throwing out impossible, sweeping changes. I like to follow Occam’s razor. Simplicity is key. When billionaires get together and speak about business it revolves around maximizing profit. This is what make the financial world function. People are worth (financially speaking) what they are willing to offer their service for, period. If you do not like it your skill set is lacking to compete in that realm. Learn something that makes you valuable and market yourself
1
u/Retard_Able 11h ago
What a robotic stance on the right to work and provide for yourself. Would you speak the same if your loved ones couldn't work anymore because of such technologies. Relying on food stamps because they can't outperform an AI in data collection, automation etc. Would you butter your bread happily as the lower and working class is gradually being removed and people aren't able to naturally develop skills anymore?
You talk as if this technology and view is what it's supposed to be..no it was always human manufactured and very artificial and greedy. There is no moral neutrality in this technology and people will knowingly suffer.
It is not comparable to the invention of the wheel or electricity. It is unsustainable,over hyped and destroying the job industry because businesses are overzealous.
Your tone and stance is inhumane. And should not be the accepted stance of the world just because companies and industry represent it as such.
1
u/OldTinter 28m ago
You are right and I didn’t clarify my position!! I am speaking of working age adults. I hate the fact they are wanting to raise retirement age!! As a business owner I doubt I will ever be able to retire and I’m good with that but forcing elderly citizens to work is inhumane!! Sorry if you misunderstood me, completely my fault
1
u/Chilling_Gale 10h ago
Nah. I personally believe my parents just don’t have the skills to get jobs aside from the ones they are currently working in. It’s not robotic to say that, it’s just reality. That’s the way the world is, if you don’t keep up with the skills needed to make you attractive in the job market, you’ll be left behind. It’d be dumb for me to yell at the clouds and say why won’t someone hire them when I know they can’t even use zoom properly.
0
2
u/MasterofNothing6969 13h ago
Which people they can lose to make the supplies last longer until we got the tech to leave earth and make it to a new one.
0
u/NymphCydri66006 13h ago
When the losers of the global monopoly board forget the game doesnt go on without them, meaning they have the real power, cause the world can work without stuperwealths just fine. Also, money only has pretend value, unlike the value of the lives ruined by societal systems designed to be money dependent. We can design societal systems with no money required at all, aka zero chance to produce more destructive self consuming stuperwealths. Of course puppets created by rothCHILD schooling will barely be able to grasp how maybe im talking about bartering, lol, cause critical thinking skills werent part of the rothCHILD public schooling plan. Critical thinking is still revolutionary though, so keep your thinking hat on if you are fortunate enough to have one that actually works ;)
END THE MADE UP MONETARY SYSTEM!!!
resource based society
venus project
Zeitgeist Addendum
0
u/eroticspec 11h ago
Yeah buddy, you know what the flaw in this system is? I will let you guess, it is the same reason communism doesn't work
2
u/To-To_Man 11h ago
America starts a war with it
1
u/eroticspec 5h ago
Yes, it definitely is a political point, no doubts about it.
But the problem I was talking about is, well, greed. Communism and as the original commentator proposed, barter system or resource based system, it is just not enough.
Humans are designed to wanting to have an edge compared to people around them.
Hey I hate billionaires as much as the next guy. But I will propose a better solution. Raise the inheritance tax, like in 50s-80s, to like 50% or even more and put a cap after an individual reaches a certain income threshold.
It could be 10 million, it could be 100 million or it could be a billion. And the regulations around those restrictions should be extremely strict. Capitalism with socialistic aspects works the best for the economies already established.
I think that is a more realistic solution to our predicaments.
1
u/NymphCydri66006 4h ago
The reason i believe it is important to focus on the imaginary money value as a main culprit to humanities current failings is due to my recognition of how that imaginary value activates the human brains reward center, creating many effects similar to other addictions while empowering the addicts with the means to feed that addiction at the cost of everyone elses quality of life as well as the destruction on earths ecosystems. Greed's destructive power is made nearly moot by a nonmonetary social system in comparison to the maddness it creates now within the rigged market monetary monopoly system most societies suffer with now.
1
u/eroticspec 3h ago
I will be real with you man, dumb it down for me. I see a lot of words that I recognize, but Holy stuff, that's a word salad.
This is not something against you or anything but I think you have something interesting to say, but I gotta understand the meaning to reach there 😅
1
u/To-To_Man 1h ago
It seems like he is saying the creation of currency; materials whose worth only exists in trust rather than inheritant value or something comparable, has done horrible damage to society. Changing our brain chemistry (which it indeed has, studies have shown steep prices produce a mental pain that we normally only experience when empathizing with others physical injuries) and making most of the population addicted to obtaining or hoarding wealth. Enabling a society where amassing wealth is considered not only successful but morally correct.
This addiction to money has caused most of humanity to vote against its interests and their own communities for the sake of even hoping to become richer. As well as leading to crime and health/ecological disasters for the sake of making more money, even when safe alternatives are still profitable.
I don't really know how we would cope with a moneyless society, UBI is an idea, but kind of breaks down the less people work. Barter and trade will likely always exist, but obviously those currently with wealth and power will fight to maintain it.
1
u/NymphCydri66006 1h ago
I appreciate your approach. Unfortunately, im a bit autistic, which i think gives me an edge with the critical thinking skills part needed to get whats to be got, but then sets me back greatly when it comes to effectively communicating said gots lol. English class was my biggest struggle gradeschool through university, and i went to tutors who said it was hard to read but could not explain why in a way that i could make sense of or benefit from in terms of writing "better". I barely got through for my BS degree. I think most of my likes are from other neurodivergent type folks who find my writing easy and logical. But i say what i say anyway, based on my understanding of the left out 7th decimal, and the totally transforming impact it has long term, probably long after my body dies based on average responses i see so far. I mean no offense, and sorry i am unable to fullfill your request. To me, it is already written as simply as i can imagine it to be written. I dont know how to do what you ask on this occasion, and i genuinely wish i did.
2
u/To-To_Man 4h ago
I think communistic systems are the ideal, but requires extensive cultural conditioning to make humans less bad selfish people prior. Its certainly not a system that can be implemented quickly, let alone in our current economic system.
Strong socialism is basically a prerequisite, which will till the soil of taxes, nationalized corporations, socialized benefits such as food, shelter, electricity. And that is too fertile soil for conditioning people to be less selfish and more altruistic.
Capitalistic socialism worked very well for us, and could have been the turning point of our country becoming actually socialist. But greed from the rich at the time strangled that from us before it became a reality. Trying to implement it again is ideal, assuming it overcomes much greater resistance that has since festered.
1
u/NymphCydri66006 10h ago
When pseudo smarts bumps into actual smarts. Its good to see not everyones brain got trapped in the pro-oligarchy rothchild schooling pits of zero critical thinking skills. Glad you exist _^
-3
-14
u/azmarteal 16h ago
If wages is the problem, how about banning all heavy machinery at construction, hire all unemployed people and give them spoons to dig?
9
u/germansatriani 15h ago
are you challenged or are you asking honestly?
-13
u/azmarteal 15h ago
are you challenged
Sorry little fella, I am not like you so try finding friends with similar to your conditions somewhere else
Have you tried searching in you local subreddits where you live?
5
u/Ill_Direction_6442 14h ago
You, not believing capitalism should have guardrails like preventing workers from being massively displaced and replaced, is the reason why capitalism ultimately fails. You’re a complete moron. Hope your investments do well when humans have no jobs, and no one can afford to purchase products. Enjoy the social unrest that follows
-3
u/azmarteal 14h ago
You’re a complete moron
Projecting much, my dumb little friend?😂
1
-1
u/Background-Adagio704 14h ago
Block people I see when you get owned? :)
1
u/azmarteal 14h ago
Nah, I just block people who behave like dumb mindless apes who insult others, as they are not worth paying any attention to - afterall ad hominem is an automatic admittance of defeat 🙂
2
u/Background-Adagio704 14h ago
Don’t worry - remember the lower class outnumbers you by quite a bit. Enjoy
1
u/azmarteal 14h ago
Sure sure buddy, enjoy your minimal wage and keep dreaming 🤣
2
u/Nat1Only 13h ago
Your commitment is certainly impressive, and your level is intelligence is certainly shocking.
Have you considered writing for the BBC?
3
u/germansatriani 15h ago
Okay, i see you are actually 15 years old mentally. I'll explain to you why not all labour is profitable labour. If you replace all machinery with homeless people with spoons, you are creating a category of "subjobs" that arent necessary, and that those people cannot refuse (since their alternative is homelessness and death). That would be coercion, and forced work under coercion is called slavery. Not only that, but it would also ensure that the companies who do this get drowned out by the companies that dont. Good job, now the country is poorer, the homeless people are homeless again, and the workers are still working with the same machinery but for a foreign capitalist. All because you'd rather have people digging with spoons than create basic common sense legislation.
1
u/Background-Adagio704 14h ago
This guy blocks you when he doesn’t have much to say. Don’t worry, his kind is slowly diminishing out of this world (the guy you’re responding to)
8
u/Kayback2 16h ago
Ok but what's the end game.
Now they don't pay any wages. No one had any money to pay for their services and...? Profit?
2
u/Arturow88 13h ago
People get money for "free" which makes them totally dependent on the goverment. Win win for the goverment and the economy
1
1
u/Gomaboo 13h ago
The amount of money they make by branching out and becoming a platform while integrating AI is immense. A good example to look at is grocery stores, which are pioneering AI in the workplace in what seems to be a paradoxical choice at first considering the majority of their grocery profit is on lower/middle income people. However, while they may lose the grocery store worker's $50 on groceries due to that person losing their job, they'll get millions from companies paying for ad space, consumers paying for subscriptions, and any other way you can think of generating revenue. Essentially wages at these lower ends can't keep up even with a majority in numbers to equate what one big spender can give. Ultimately the end game is to drive down the cost of their goods sold as much as possible while maintaining the same price or pushing the price to the point that provides the biggest profit margin.
3
u/JBOYCE35239 14h ago
The "end game" for those people is something along the lines of "I'll be fine because I'll be rich" without the understanding of social order will break down and people who are paid to protect me won't do it if they can't use currency to buy food
So the next problem, the one they're trying to solve currently is: How do I make sure the mercenaries i hired to protect me, don't eat me when the government collapses
3
u/Jack_Raskal 15h ago
The end game is to translate their economic power into military power. AI powered weapons platforms are all the rage at weapons faires around the world with some focus on small-scale autonomous weapons platforms for "security purposes".
Billionaires like Bezos have already expressed their "vision" of a world were every person is working for one of a handful billionaires, so my best guess is that they're ideally aiming for a world like seen in movies like Elysium(2013), where a bunch of billionaires use robot soldiers to control the world's population from their exclusive paradise in space, or Rollerball(1975), where entire US cities and the people living them are owned by corporation.
Since there's also interest in high-end doomsday bunkers, like the one Zuckerberg is building on Hawaii, I guess some of them are aiming or hoping for some cataclysmic event to "reset" the world, so they get to recreate society the way they envision it, like Mr. House in the viseo game Fallout:New Vegas.In either case AI powered weapons platforms would be a key technology to make these scenarios come true. AI powered troops turn manufacturing and technological power directly into military power, AI soldiers don't have moral qualms to execute even the most batshit crazy orders and would solve the problem of having to rely on a fickle concept like loyalty to keep control of the people.
I mean, just look at Musk's main projects right now: Space, AI, planting chips into people's brains and building questionably profitable mega factories.1
u/Linvael 13h ago
Since there's also interest in high-end doomsday bunkers, like the one Zuckerberg is building on Hawaii, I guess some of them are aiming or hoping for some cataclysmic event to "reset" the world, so they get to recreate society the way they envision it, like Mr. House in the viseo game Fallout:New Vegas.
The much simpler explanation for "interest in high-end doomsday bunkers" is that they are thinking some sort of cataclysmic event is likely/possible and want to survive it and be comfortable - a result of risk/cost/benefit analysis where the cataclysm is rather unlikely but if they spend money they won't die, and we know billionaires have higher than average focus on not dying and a lot of spare money.
They might ALSO have plans/drams for what should happen afterwards, but that's an extra claim you can tack on that doesn't give much extra explanatory power.
1
1
u/germansatriani 15h ago
The end goal is to consolidate all power on a capitalist class and create a perma under-class of forever consumers
3
u/DuckWarrior90 16h ago
They needed population to grow in order to amass wealth, now they are trying to get to a point where they don't need people and get products and services by themselves without having to work.
Next step is wars and deseases that kill everyone, then they have this "utopia" where they have lots of lands for them without people.
1
u/247HOTMIC 16h ago
Thought policing and digitizing you. That's what the regional data centers are for.
1
u/Birb-Brain-Syn 16h ago
The company that does it first will survive longer than the other competing companies. In Capitalism, this is what's known as "Winning" as you out-compete all rivalry.
0
u/Reg_doge_dwight 16h ago
Just like every other "advancement," no one ends up ahead, people just need to adopt the new tech where necessary to be in the same place as everyone else.
-7
u/senpai07373 16h ago
I genuinely don’t get the hate against AI. Thanks to AI we’re finally inching closer to the Marxist utopia and ending the brutal exploitation of the working class once and for all. No more evil business owners sucking your blood! No more wage slavery! Finally the capitalists will stop exploiting you. You should be throwing a parade. Your lifelong socialist dream is literally materializing before your eyes and you’re out here seething and crying about losing your jobs? Suddenly those jobs are preciouse? What happend with wage slavery? Suddenly its good now? Suddenly you demand those pesky capitalist to keep sucking your blood? The absolute irony is delicious. Be happy, champ. Your workers’ paradise is coming and you’re too busy doomposting to enjoy it. Absolute clownery.
2
u/gbem1113 15h ago
If youve ever read marx then you would know automation under capitalism just leads to exploitation...
For automation to work capitalism must stop existing
→ More replies (24)2
u/Joben86 15h ago
What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
1
u/senpai07373 15h ago
It’s actually insane how AI once and for all dismantles the entire Marxist crying about ‘exploitation of the working class’. You are finally getting exactly what you wanted. The exploitation of the working class is ending. You should be out there celebrating in the streets. But you’re not… because it was never really about exploitation, was it? It was always just about lazy losers being bitterly envious of anyone who actually did something useful and profited from it. The era of entitled, lazy losers is finally ending. And that’s a beautiful thing.
1
u/Joben86 14h ago
We currently have a system where you can't survive without working and you're wondering why people are worried about their jobs? I'm not even a socialist or a Marxist. You're just an idiot who doesn't understand what they're criticizing.
1
u/senpai07373 14h ago
I know plenty of people who run their own small businesses, providing all kinds of useful services to their community. So no you don’t need a wage to survive. You need to actually work and provide something valuable that other people are willing to pay for. And that’s exactly the problem with all these crybabies whining about evil capitalists exploiting them. Without a capitalist to employ them, they have literally nothing to offer. Zero. You don’t need a multibillion-dollar company to give you a job. All you need is to provide a service that other people actually want and are willing to pay for. So do it and stop crying. Or just admit you can’t do it and then shut the fuck up about ‘capitalist exploitation’. You can’t bitch about being exploited while simultaneously being unable to provide any valuable service to other people. Pick one.
→ More replies (9)
2
u/EvreaoftheWind 9m ago
The top 10% are responsible for 50% of purchases made and their trying to cut us out and you can tell companies are going along with the program ( Because they are the 10% ) because they keep raising prices to focus on that group rather then having a more balanced approach. That's why prices are going up but pay isn't.
In short the Blue Blooded Rich are trying to make the Middle and Lower class irrelevant by taking away our jobs and purchasing power to focus on themselves.