We’re finally about to launch a plushie, but only if we get enough pledges for this campaign: www.makeship.com/petitions/rational-animations-doggo-plushie If we reach at least 200 pledges, Doggo will become a real plushie! After Makeship manufactures it, you’ll be charged the remaining balance (27.99 USD + shipping and tax), and he will be shipped to you! ---------------------------------------------- Now you know why it was taking so long. This is our most important video so far. Note on the part about slavery: A lot of people have pointed out that, despite slavery being formally abolished in every nation, it is still practiced in many places around the world. We recognize that this issue remains unsolved, and we did not mean to minimize the problem. Our main point was that many things about our world that we take for granted could fundamentally change in the future, and we wanted to highlight slavery as one historical example of something big that began to change. Also, sorry for misspelling "agriculture" and for any other spelling mistake that might have slipped. Sometimes the motherland comes out. 🟠 Patreon: www.patreon.com/rationalanimations 🔵 Channel membership: th-cam.com/channels/gqt1RE0k0MIr0LoyJRy2lg.htmljoin 🟤 Ko-fi, for one-time and recurring donations: ko-fi.com/rationalanimations
I think AI is a suicide pact technology. It's something that could destroy us or we'll expend so many resources trying to achieve it instead of putting them in something else that could save us.
I never really thought about the fact that for most of human history the generational gaps in knowledge were basically nonexistent. There was no feeling of "my grandpa doesn't know how to use any modern technology." We're some of the first generations to not rely on elders for knowledge about living in this society since times are rapidly changing. That's heavy.
Today's generation is alarmingly uninformed about the real world, they have endless distractions that previous generations did not have. These distractions have gone so far as to make them unable to have proper human relationships. I'm not saying all are like this but it is an alarming trend noted by many social scientists.
Well there was the collapse of the Roman empire . It's technological knowledge about architecture , water management, agriculture, concrete , etc,etc was lostm and it took centuries before Europe learned to re-build . .So that could happen to us as well.
@@spiritualanarchist8162 not saying you're entirely incorrect, but from what I've seen, it was also that due to the economy of scale, many of the technologies from the Roman empire were not really feasible for the much smaller fragmented powerblocs in post roman European countries. It's a bit like the fact that many native Indian American tribes used to use copper tools, but stopped using them after it became more of an effort to extract the copper than the benefits provided. The original inhabitants of the island of Tasmania also seemingly went back in technological advancement after they were cut off from the mainland of Australia.
You ain't changing shxt. You will die and be forgotten forever. We all will. Society hasn't changed it just looks different but we still got the same problems and it will be like that until we go extinct.
Came here to say this. As he was listing off characteristics of what AGI "should" be, I was thinking to myself, "they've already implemented this a month ago."
Our current generation* is the singularity, apparently. It's wild. * (and the many generations of machine constructs that will be iterated in our lifespans)
Well, if "AGI until 2100" is closer than you think, so, yeah. AGI in 75+ years from now is the most "healthy" guess made by very bright people (dont need to trust me, just google it).
@@GamingDistortion It might be, what I've read about it is as amazing as unsettling, and it's bound to force changes in societies all over the world, soon.
Slavery, whilst illegal, is still practiced in certain parts of the world, particularly by company's from the countries that have outlawed slavery. I think what Adam Smith may have been referring too, is that from how he saw humans behave, it was something in human nature such as greed that caused slavery to be impossible to eradicate entirely.
@@stefantkalcic1491 I'll take what passes for slavery in the US over the human induced famines of communism. how you could look at the body count of Marxism and still seriously advocate it is baffling.
Humans however are not inherently greedy. There's thousands of years of archeological evidence on top of current day sociological studies that find humans are very altruistic creatures. Slaves tend to come from either a perceived necessity of free labor, such as under capitalism, or from the need to control a population, like in Sparta. Further, especially under capitalism, slavery happens under elites and business owners, not as something owned by the general population
Yes. But projecting our recent period of exponential growth into the future is also making the same mistake. Technological progress proceeding exponentially is a current trend. We should not assume it will continue indefinitely. Technologies mature. For any particular technology, the exponential levels off to make an S-curve. The aggregate only keeps growing exponentially because we find new technologies. That has to eventually come to an end.
Give all the alien contactee testimony, time traveller testimony and channellers: One thing that this guy overlooks is that a few specific technological discoveries/advances will fundamentally change the entire idea of an economy. Once you have the "duplicator" or better called the "replicator" like it is called in Star Trek, where you only need to have the atomic structural data, not the actual thing as well as "zero point energy" (in other words "free energy from the quantum field") There is an unlimited amount of resources available, true to the nature of the universe. Once these technologies are released to the public sphere (because they already exist but are supressed, that is also why technological advances has "slowed down" the last century) we wont have need for "economical growth", "competition", "taxes", "banks", "loans" even "government" in the sense as we know it today. What will matter will be living in harmony with nature, holistic and ecologically sound lifestyles at the same time we zoom around space and discover the universe (because yeah, there will be "antigravity" too). Even more so non-material subjects will become more important as all material needs are met. In other words, spirituality will become the next focus.
@Chris Walker apple is already starting to experience this. Can't remember where I heard but apparently they are struggling with the new 3nm processor production, sounds like we are hitting the physical size limits for how small transistors can be. This could just be a temporary roadblock though
I'm impressed by the exponential growth in doggo cuteness. Predictions in the field of AI are notoriously bad. 10 years ago people expected AIs to become more rational, not to start creating creepy art and stories with a dreamlike quality.
Predictions about AI becoming super logical thinking, or coming just around the corner, at this stage are simply unscientific, they are random speculation fueled by science fiction (in turn fueled by a layman's understanding of how computers are unlike us). The stuff being called "AI" here is just machine-learning (and mostly artificial neural networks, an approach based on acting like a simplified brain), which is well-understood and only really working so much because of cheap computing and data; as far back as the 70s, ANNs were developing bizarre solutions to highly complex problems where rational approaches would fail. Even the 2060s estimate of AI researchers is almost certainly a rosy picture influenced by their hopes, and I think the idea we can just pay for a sufficiently-large ANN to get AGI one day, as this video looks at, is misguided. ANNs will certainly play roles, and may even do most of them better than AGI, but they are not necessarily AGI.
I have a background in ML and I've been a skeptic for years. Dall-E knocked my socks off, I thought something like that wouldn't be possible for another century. When AGI comes it's gonna be some disappointingly simple concept, backed up by massive amounts of data
What we have are pattern recognition algorithms. It's just the patterns being recognized can be made up OF patterns. That's how it can quickly balloon in complexity. (meaning recognizing patterns of patterns of patterns...................)
@@michaelbuckersehh, capitalism? I guess? I mean people did a ton of things that were against ToS so they just dumbed it down every time. Also they could have just restricted its power to free users, idk never used that thing
This channel really is amazing, but I feel bad. I feel bad that such amount of work with a incredible script, narration, drawing and animation doesn't have millions os views. You deserve a lot more. Love your videos, and I wish I could afford patreon, but I can only give you my like. I hope one day you became widely recognized on TH-cam
wait until the swarm of hungry data bots get a hold of this channel. then it'll have million of views. no seriously why do you think most other channels have so many views etc. more than 50 and my guess is 90 percent is bots. but the real scary thought is, are they self aware 😳
One hundred years ago: got a return of 100 barrels Oil by spending One Barrel; In 1970 got 25 Barrels of Oil by spending One Barrel; In 2000 got 10 Barrels of Oil by spending One Barrel; In 2020 get 3.5 Barrels of Oil by spending One Barrel. Economic Development follows Use of Oil extremely precisely. It takes about 40 to 50 years for a New Technology to be adopted.
OMG, I love how you presented the duplicator as some sort of "wildest" case, and then showing that it's peanuts compared to what AI, even narrow AI, could do. Puts the crazy in great perspective.
We are already ran into the limit of productivity. The ability to consume the products of that productivity produces and how long that product is consumed.
@@mattheww.6232 Dunno about you, but I don't see us be at the limit here. I live a good life, but there are many things that I would consume that right now I cannot, because they are not cheap enough. And that also goes for things "I do not have the time for", because in much of my time awake, I am working to earn the things my family and I consume.
I find it very interesting how you showed how the rapid change in technology has such a vital impact on how generations look at each other. 'Grandma, please don't touch the television while we're gone' could be a 1955 equivalent to the modern 'Mom, an MMO can't be put on pause.' Before this rapid change in technology the elderly were approached for their wisdom. Now it can be hard for this same elderly to keep up with new technology. This alone shows how the rapid change of technology impacts social structures as well. And this video showed that very well.
And if all this new technology ever breaks down suddenly (solar mass ejection, EMP, etc,) we elders will have to rebuild society and teach you all how to survive again without this Technology helping you. So don't write us off so easily or so soon!!🙎♂️🤔😏 Cheers...👍✌️💪
@chefscorner7063 I'm not sure society as a whole can be rebuilt so easy. Things out of elders' control are gonna happen if everything goes down like you said
Or dad might say, “son, the MMO you talk about evolved from the MUDs my generation developed and played.” The rate of change may be faster, but what is NOW evolved from something that came before.
the real question occurs before the sinngularity, when AI becomes effective enough at doing most human work, making most people obsolete: Will the masters of capital allow us, the masses, to live, independent of the economic value we provide? Unfortunately, I believe the answer is no. We will have to make them. This is the the most important struggle that will determine the future of humanity. It is essential that we become self-aware, as a whole, as a species, before the algorithms do. Because the algorithms will be controlled by our economic masters.
Plus climate catastrophy growing to apocalyptic size... So take this crisis and put it into a world without natural ecosystems, extreme weather's out of every arse, hundreds of millions refugees in Europe and america, far more than we had EVER seen A much smaller map due to floodings and Russia being the most powerful country becouse the are actually winners and not just loosers becouse their cold areas become warm. Ouh and outside of climate>Democracys dying everywhere and populist and capitalism going super charged with companys becoming powerful enough to buy fucking land (looking at u Amazon) and make their own rules.(outside of classic corruption "lobbyism") So yeah EVERYTHINGS FUCKED
@@OgdenM I’m surprised that a lot of people aren’t, I guess it depends on how desensitized you become throughout your life before you can avoid being worn down by it.
THIS. Machines need to be owned by the common folk, if they are owned by the rich few, we could be facing the start of a new feudal system, or even slavery.
@@b48292 and you sound jealous and bitter. Are you that offended that somebody decided to donate money towards what they felt like was an incredibly informative video that they have a lot of respect for the people's time and putting the video and information together for others to sit back and watch and enjoy for free? It says a lot more about you than it does them. Actually it shows that they're very appreciative of the time and dedication that was committed towards putting this video together and for you that shows exactly as I said that you're jealous and bitter. If you yourself wanted that $5 then maybe put a video together but you commit a lot of time and energy into. The amount of hate that people spread in the comments is just fucking pathetic. Do better. Or don't it's up to you. However just know that karma is a bitch and what you put out will return to you. So don't be surprised and don't blame anybody but yourself.
My problem with predicting the future is that it's impossible to account for curve balls and Black swan events - especially when it comes to people and politics. Predictions tend towards either optimistic or way, _way_ too pessimistic. I can only suspect that there's no fix to this problem because nobody has seemed to do so yet, with the possible caveat of the consequences of climate change being understated. While some future predictions do seem to be understated, it does seem to be an outlier. The fact of the matter is that the expression "may you live in interesting times" was coined as a curse. I, for one, am _so fucking tired_ of living in interesting times.
@@ThePioneeringPixel Most economists argue that it'll have something like a -3% impact on the global GDP in the coming century or whatever. I think it's mostly 14 year olds wanting to live in interesting times hyping it up to some world ending thing because they saw a documentary on it and got depression from the background music.
@@neo-filthyfrank1347 I really think it will be very violent. When people get poor because of things like climate, they may not be starving, but just hungry, they get violent. Especially when they have different social views. Imagine communists migrating to a religious country for example. Or simply economic migrants being targeted by xenophobes for taking their jobs. The real danger of climate change is that we cannot be sure exactly of the social effects, even if we understand the effects on nature. This is because macroeconomics is not easy.
@@موسى_7 I'm doubtful of that. You must always use caution when assuming trends you see now are going to continue, because they usually don't. If you want environmental issues overfishing is liable to many times worse than climate change, but I don't think that's going to go unsolved either. Fish farming coupled with genetic engineering, etc.
It’s not happening. This is like Bitcoin all over again. It’s not a thing. Neither are robots. AI just plagiarizes things that are on the Internet. We all do it. This is just a gimmick.
8 months later and GPT-4 is being scientifically described as having “sparks of AGI”. The acceleration of this tech is mind boggling, the world 5 years from now may be wildly different to even 2019.
2-3 years to the singularity is my current prediction. Base on 'emergent behaviors over time'. That graph has turned the curve on the hockey stick imo.
"There are two kinds of scientific progress: the methodical experimentation and categorization which gradually extend the boundaries of knowledge, and the revolutionary leap of genius which redefines and transcends those boundaries. Acknowledging our debt to the former, we yearn nonetheless for the latter." -Academician Prokhor Zakharov
@@eddiebreen5933 right. Like Trump's Operation Warpspeed, that pushed the development of vaccines and also Trump granted legal immunity to Pfizer for any and all damages incurred by the vaccines
It's really funny for me it was 3 days ago I watched a few videos from this channel and watched all of his videos on reward functions from his other channel and computerphile, super interesting.
11:25 the dark side of the duplicator is that you are choosing who is valuable to duplicate and who is not, or just by who can pay for it. Leaving the rest behind. Forming a new class system of elites or eugenics.
The Bible is truth. Please read at least three books. The first book of each testament and one you chose yourself. It’s important to remember that it’s the doing that’s key. Look inside and do your inner healing. To be forgiven we must forgive-
Very true that it could go in reverse but if existence is forever and evolution leads to god like state then it would just be a matter of probability of wich civilization will come out of existence still standing with a belief system that isnt emcopessed by greed of power, but the chances that its are civilization that will lead existances is slim to none seeing how consuming are society is. Will end up consuming everything tills nothing and then boom back to square one were another big bang might occur. The circle of life the circle of existence. Theres no other point to it. I believe that creation created god. There was never a meaning until we decided theres one. Same way a star decided to light in the face of the eternal abyss of space. For no other purpose then to exist. To be or not to be. Good or bad both have a place. Nothing is something. Something is nothing
@@jamesmayle3787 when you say ‘doing’, are you referring to action, or encryption? I find flanking language narcissistic sometimes, like watching Mr Collins in Pride and Predudice slimily sneak his hand under the table to touch and see if they’ll accept it. Obviously people that are trained to accept these subtle violations of space don’t appear to feel any uncomfortability or they’d reject such ways of such insidious trespasses, rather than term them ‘sensitive’, ‘well mannered’, ‘spiritually and emotionally healthy’ or, ‘reciprocated’.
Maybe a subjective take, but coming from a European rural village, I found the beginning of the 2020s to already have been full of innovations: We got our first ever 3d-Printer, robot vacuum cleaner and AI applications seem to be going through the roof recently(e.g. Dall-E mini; for a free service, I consider it quite awesome).
YEES!!! We can't just _L U M P_ us all toghether in data if we are not willing to have everything in _C O M M O N_ . Tis an illusion and lying by dataism. The planet is not overcrowded, *C I T I E S A R E* !
I think when Carl said we were insignificant, he wasn't trying to belittle the human species, but instead was trying to counter the inflated sense of self and superiority that we give ourselves. We're not insignificant and we're not significant, we are equal to everything else in creation..... treating things outside of ourselves the way we treat ourselves is the key to synchronicity.
as long as AGI works for everyone, having a job might be something of the past, if you had housing, food and entertainment by AGI, would it be a nightmare to you? There's different ways AGI could be delivered, lets hope its not the nightmarish way
You have absolutely not even .01% of the knowledge and understanding required to make such a statement about the future and its immeasurable complexity that NONE in the world grasps. The fact that you do make it with such complete confidence makes you a moron by itself.
And now, about 8 months after this video, chatGPT-4 shows 'sparks of AGI'. 8 months lads, it took 8 months to go from "Maybe 30-40 years" to "Most likely 10 years". Enjoy the show, for we, the ones alive today, are the only ones in the entire human existence to see such an explosive growth in technology and society. For better, or for worse.
Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in constructing a computer that behaves as if it understands Chinese. It takes Chinese characters as input and, by following the instructions of a computer program, produces other Chinese characters, which it presents as output. Suppose, that this computer performs its task so convincingly that it comfortably passes the Turing test: it convinces a human Chinese speaker that the program is itself a live Chinese speaker. To all of the questions that the person asks, it makes appropriate responses, such that any Chinese speaker would be convinced that they are talking to another Chinese-speaking human being. Supposes that I am in a closed room and have a book with an English version of the computer program, along with sufficient papers, pencils, erasers, and filing cabinets. I could receive Chinese characters through a slot in the door, process them according to the program's instructions, and produce Chinese characters as output, without understanding any of the content of the Chinese writing. If the computer had passed the Turing test this way, it follows, that I would do so as well, simply by running the program manually. There are no essential differences between the roles of the computer and me in the experiment. Both simply follow a program, step-by-step, producing behavior that is then interpreted by the user as demonstrating intelligent conversation. However, I myself would not be able to understand the conversation. (I don't speak a word of Chinese) Therefore, it follows that the computer would not be able to understand the conversation either.
@@sumsarsiranen the bit that you are missing is that the combined system of the person and the translator understands. It doesn't really make sense to isolate one part of the system and claim it doesn't understand Chinese, therefore the system doesn't understand Chinese. That would be like claiming our brain doesn't understand visual stimuli just because it is blind with the eyes removed.
Originally I had more criticisms, but you addressed most of them later in the video, so bravo for that. Of the remaining issues: I think AI is going to hit a wall in the next few years due to certain factors. Processing power will hit a wall because microchips are running into a hard size limit due to quantum fluctuations affecting the electrical circuits, and deep learning as you mentioned is very data hungry and we are quickly approaching an exponential drop-off in terms of data fed to results given. Not to mention there are some tasks that deep learning is infamously bad at, such as dealing with novel inputs- a contest to write an AI that could beat a randomized roguelike video game was held a couple years back and the winner out of a sea of deep learning based algorithms was a simple symbol manipulation algorithm. I personally think a hybrid symbol manipulation-deep learning model is the way to go and certain recent programs (such as an advanced protein folding algorithm) have deployed it to great success, but from what I’ve seen there’s a lot of bad blood between deep learning and symbol manipulation parties within the computer science field. Also we’ve traditionally not focused on optimization as we could rely on hardware getting exponentially more powerful to deal with that deficit, but now that we’re running up against a wall it’s not something we can ignore any longer in my opinion. I also noticed a distinct lack of the mention of ethics in your video. Lawmaking and ethical concerns are a major driver in technological breakthroughs (and holding them back). We’ve been able to clone animals for years now but it’s not in wide use due to the massive ethical concerns it poses. Lawmaking too can hold back progress (though sometimes for the better of humanity). We’ve had the ability to do drone delivery for packages for quite a while but it’s only just recently that many major cities have allowed companies to legally. I know this channel is about the bigger picture, but it feels remiss to not include at least a footnote on the topic of ethics in societal progress. EDIT: Some general addendums - I’m aware quantum computing/computers exist, but at the moment the technology is in its infancy and is extremely expensive to produce and requires extreme conditions to maintain (namely supercooling) - The ethical issues around cloning include: the consent of the person being cloned, the consent of the clone, the issue of eugenics and negatively affecting the diversity of the human gene pool, and the clone being treated like a robot by essentially being brought into the world to fulfill a specific purpose - I’ve noticed a general attitude of “my conclusion is the logical one and no one should have an issue with it. If they do then they’re backwards.” In my experience that doesn’t change peoples’ minds, especially people who don’t agree with you in the first place. To actually change minds, you need to listen to people who don’t agree with you and try to understand why they think that way. You don’t have to agree with them, but if you don’t try to understand them then no communication can be had- closing yourself off to opposing opinions is the exact “warrior mindset” that this very channel has done a video on previously. Just try to be good people, okay?
I'd beg to differ on the point of animal cloning not being in wide use due to ethics. I'd say it's due to the cost: $50k and up for a simple cat or dog. But if you've got the money burning a hole in your pocket, ViaGen will clone your pet for you.
@@mal2ksc oh sure, the cost is definitely part of it. But the elephant in the room is that technically humans should be possible to clone too, if we can do it with animals. The fact that we don’t is definitely due to ethics
@@ozzi9816 I will agree with both of those premises with respect to _human_ cloning. It is possible, and the cost is high but not insurmountable. It's the ethics that keep it from happening, not the engineering.
I think AI kind of hit the wall already, and people are just engineering around it to make it work for some tasks. Also keep in mind that clones are often very unhealthy and are babies too.
Politicians and busybodies will generally forbid things they don't understand - I hope you're wrong about the reason cloning is rare, because that would signal a victory of pop sci fearmongering over a relatively non-risky (compared to AI) technology. In particular, cloning would hugely benefit humanity because we'd be able to choose eugenics over out current dysgenics - but due to ideology alone many people consider that a bad thing.
One thing the analysis in the beginning misses is the idea of low hanging fruit. In any given field or industry there will be some things that will be easy enough to discover and/or invent, but as time goes on these things become less and less common and the things left become harder and harder to develop or discover (take fusion vs fission as an example). If we assume this to be the case, then it wouldn't be strange to have an explosion of discovery and invention over a short period of time after something like the industrial revolution, like we've had, and then see a slow decline in the number of things discovered and invented, even as total world productivity increases. Just another possible idea.
The Bible is truth. Please read at least three books. The first book of each testament and one you chose yourself. It’s important to remember that it’s the doing that’s key. Look inside and do your inner healing. To be forgiven we must forgive-
GPT is still really bad at some things but since launch? Easily 10 times better with 4o. I think 2027 is when things will snap, with a lot of massive non AGI improvements in between. I don't see this tech suddenly hitting a wall, physical world disrupting disasters notwithstanding. Hardware has slowed in some respects but only because we are up against physical constraints with nanolithography (2nm architecture is wild) and bit flipping via quantum tunneling, but error correction is taking care of that. Replacing all human labor will take longer simply because we need to build billions of robots to make that a reality, so 2040 to ramp that up, and holy hell will we drag our feet to maintain the status quo, for that at best. We won't have robots building factories to make robots before then, and it will still be niche. I say 2036 (but still expensive and niche) before we have the hardware (the software will be ready well before that) Where you can just rent a fleet of robots, give them a budget, and put them to work on, well, anything. Dig a garden, wash your car, refloor your bathroom. Everyone is clamoring over AI but we are physical beings, with physical needs, and until the robots are mass produced by robots, not that much will change.
It's kinda nightmarish to think about. Years ago, before Corona, I got kinda "blacklisted" from tech. A lack of work history, downward spiral, yadda yadda. Last year got in with a company, doing little... but it's minimum wage. By the end of 2023, most big tech ventures were laying off left and right "haha facebook had HOW MANY people working on meta?". This year, Intel might sell off its FOUNDRY sector, and now most web 'service' providers are laying off people, with forecasts of "tech support centers" being a transition technology as AI takes over phone calls. Most humans are going to be categorized by need and desire of the Owners. Should we be rats connecting wires and digging poles and painting facades, for vast technology oligarchies, or let to live in a blissful train ride of irrelevancy... in how many years? 10? 20?
This is hands down among the best channels I've came across on TH-cam yet! Such insightful analysis along with such cute doggo animations. I'm so glad that I've found your channel. Have been binge watching your videos for the past hour & think, will finish watching all the videos today. Thank you for putting out such amazing information!
I'm really fascinated by this AI boom we've had recently. In retrospect it might be akin to how we were assuming the "worldwide web" or "information superhighway" would solve every problem because seemingly every war boiled down to a lack of proper education and communication to all the tech hippies like Steve Jobs. It'll probably be way more complicated and nuanced than what we can surmise right now and many educated guesses are going to age like milk - but why not guess anyways? The more abstract I talk the more it seems like I'm envisioning the future but it's really just that my words are hollow enough to allow future minds to project themselves onto them like some bland hentai protagonist or something. "The future is going to be beyond what can be perceived right now." or something. Can you know for sure what's going to happen at 2PM next Sunday unless you have explicit plans for then that you have the will and means to carry out?
You can argue that Adam smith was right, slavery does still exist, it just changed form. I think his sentiments on the issue is still fundamentally accurate.
"Policymakers often take this perspective when crafting policy" What delusional fantasy are you living in where politicians make rational decisions and aren't completely self-serving?
I've been saying for 20 years already, as someone born in 1983, that I'll see utopia or the collapse of modern civilization in my lifetime. I was optimistic in the early 2000's. But we've been fucking up pretty damn hard. Dystopia seems to be winning. We're on a time limit regarding the environment. Civilization hasn't been sustainable since the industrial revolution. Since then, we've been in a race against the depletion of resources and the death of the ecosystem to harness our new powers as a species to develop a way of life that is sustainable, without needing to regress to small scale agrarian or hunter-gatherer. But we have done nothing with our time since I'd say the 70's but double down on consumption as an ideology, and accelerate the countdown. I was optimistic in the early 2000's, because I thought the explosion of access to information and instant global communication would create a population with heightened knowledge, awareness, and capability to fight authoritarianism. And this was true for a small window of time. But by the early 2010's, authoritarian institutions had succeeded in subverting the internet and associated technologies as a more powerful tool of social engineering and surveillance than had ever been seen before. We're not going to reach this future. We don't have time. We could. Easily. But most of us are stuck at bullshit jobs that increase misery in the world, constantly monitored by the employers and governments who rule us, while getting an average of 6 hours a sleep a night for the sake of having a mere couple hours a day to live for ourselves. Futurism like this is nothing more than science fiction entertainment, unless it incorporates the dire need for revolution in order to have any hope of reaching these futures.
1976'er here, i have the same opinion, i was also optmistic in the 2000, for the same reasons as you. then around 2010 yes.. then a kind of nail in the coffin in 2020. and today.. we got wokism (idiocy in plain text), epitome of the problem i suspect
2000 here. I can definitely see the reasoning behind the things you said. But often enough (even stated in this exact video) there were happening things we weren’t able to recognize just a few decades before. That is not to say that there aren’t rough times ahead of us but I rather take an optimistic approach over anything else. Humans have always adapted to their surroundings and it will likely be the same this time. Other than external factors I don’t think we are able to vanish from this planet any time soon due to our inherent instinct for survival. Many personal mind shifts are induced by radical changes of the circumstances. Maybe the coming catastrophes are just the catalyst for us to wake up from the kind of comfortzone hibernation we have been experiencing in recent years.
@@slickzMdzn You are young and wise. Indeed, *Hope* was the only thing left in pandora's box.. Optimism. But as one gets old, one forgets from time to time ..to remember. Guilty your honor. thx you for your opinion
The prediction in the 50’s that AI would replace human labour in 20 years is interesting but so is the prediction (I think I know who made it but I’m not sure) that there is a total global market for 5 computers and they would be owned by the richest kings on the planet. Predicting exponential and hyperbolic change is hard. What makes it harder is that the trends driving it are often a temporary part of the larger trend. One looks at the most current technology (say mechanical, clockwork computations) and sees that it will experience certain limitations without anticipating the next technological curve or the one that comes after that. Every time one of these technologies starts to lose momentum the economic incentive to develop a replacement to keep the progress in productivity increases and more money, time and effort gets invested into the next big thing.
Consider that money is not what we need to do things. It is resources that we actually need. Consider that 'economy' is defined as the 'careful management of available resources' and if we look at our current monetary-market system, with all the enormous waste it produces, needlessly, for profit, not for sustainability, we must ask: Why would we expect sustainability from an unsustainable system structure? The answer, of course, is that we can't. We have to think outside the box. Inside the box thinking doesn't do much good. Most, if not all, scientific discoveries came from people thinking outside the box, asking critical questions, finding evidence and developing new ways, better ways, and more efficient ways of doing things. We need a system that encourages the best of us, and discourages the worst of our behaviours. I think we can all agree we don't really want to live in a system with so much oppression, exploitation, inequality and waste. That is clearly not very healthy and we can do better.
Major problem here: infinite growth for the sake of growth is the mantra of the cancer cell. The planet cannot withstand humanity now, let alone at an even more productive level. The goals we are setting here - what are they really for? Why must we increase our economy? Unless we scale back our production, we will ensure our extinction.
I think the pace of technological development is still pretty rapid, but mainly in less immediate areas of general interest and/or infrastructural applicability. Speaking of infrastructure, projects have become massive in some cases made possible precisely due to major advances in metallurgy and other materials sciences indistinguishable from magic to folks even at the beginning of the "jet age."
I really love this long-term thinking!! However, something I noticed was really lacking, especially compared to the Grabby aliens theory, is some more attention to the possibility that growing too fast could be far more risky. In that other video, you mentioned that changing too fast could easily (and is very likely to) introduce various things that could wipe out or significantly set us back as a species. I appreciate how you took time to explain AI timelines and such, but more time really should have been spent focusing on how AI could result in a severe drop in productivity due to it being misused. Someone else in the comments mentioned how AI was predicted to become more 'rational' and used for various productivity-related jobs and such 10 years ago. Instead, what ended up happening is that today, much of AI is used to fine tune social media algorithms and various entertainment-related things to sell more ads, spread misinformation, and lock people into an ever deeper hole of hate and ignorance. My biggest worry is that all this progress will be largely funded, directed, and used for the purposes of extracting ever more profit in the way of consumerism, division, and so on. Sure, some people would use it for better ends, but that sliver of people would either be at a great disadvantage and not really able to effect much positive change, or continuously pressured to privatize and capitalize on their work. Then when you couple this with the environmental damage being done, the societal damage, the psychological, etc.... I just find it really unlikely that we'll make it far enough to become a real space-faring civilization... and certainly not a positive one. All that being said, I do think this is probably the most important century in the history of humanity. And I do think there is a possibility that we can steer things in the right direction. But I think we can only get the best options if we become FAR more conscious and purposeful with how we act as a species. And I think that means focusing on ways to enable the most amount of people to have a say in their own lives and to reach their highest potential. Most decisions today are made by a select few of the richest and most powerful people. These people are rarely ever also the most empathetic or forward-thinking. A great many of them or selfish, greedy, or even if they are somewhat magnanimous, they have a vision for how They think the world should be, regardless of how that would be harmful for many, many other people. (ie they are egotistical) I think the best way to maximize our chances to live is to maximize our ability to adapt to whatever might happen. That means maximizing the amount of people who can identify and solve the various problems that we are already facing, and that will crop up as we move at such a breakneck pace. If we continue how we are today, where only 1-10% of the world actually has a say in how things go, then it inevitably will lead to those people hampering our growth due to missing huge problems, and worse yet, the other 90% of the population rebelling from their authority. We even have ample historical data in past times of rapid change vs societal inequality. There is always a reckoning. Pretty much every single empire and age of 'progress' has been followed by some kind of cataclysm and collapse. We really need to do something different this time, as the sheer scale of our now global societies/empires means there will be global disaster. So yeah, I think more needs to be said about the reality of societal inequality and unrest. It seems a lot of people, even (or especially) in the wealthiest nations feel terribly disenfranchised and helpless. Many people worry more about their bills then future possibilities. We really need to figure out how to build a world where more/most people feel more empowered and hopeful about the positive change they can produce or at least experience.
YES. I was thinking the whole video how it would be wonderful for IA to grow but it will ultimately be used for the benefit of the top and the detriment of the bottom. A tool of oppression I am scared to imagine
There's a common sense saying in astrophysics: "If your equations point to an infinite somewhere in space, odds are it's an equation quirk rather than a real natural oddity". In a similar fashion, projecting a power law distribution is unfortunately still "working with past assumptions." Case in point, semiconductors, population growth etc. Looked powerlaw-ish until reality knocked on the door. The scientific method can NEVER go beyond the *problem* *of* *induction*, something philosophers as early as pre-Socratics knew.
my thoughts exactly. A singularity in the equations doesn't mean "whacky things incoming", but rather means "the assumptions this equation is based on aren't valid anymore".
Except usually when anything diverges to infinity like that, you can easily smell there's a problem. You can say it's most likely the limitations of your models, measurements and calculations. Here it's a different story because everything points to that. How is this century NOT the turning point? That's what I find hard to answer.
Ayup. While A.I will be big, I don't think it's even possible to build something *smarter than humans, because we don't even really understand what general intelligence is. Sure we can make something that's 'smarter' at a specific task, but if human brains were that specialized then they'd instantly outperform even the best computer. You can't make something that's perfect at everything - there's just not enough resources, and so creating general intelligence runs into the same problem we do: that if pragmatism. If you want something then you have to sacrifice something, that's simply how the universe works. Even our technology today doesn't make us smarter than humans of the past, so i think assuming that, even if ai could reach a point of general intelligence, we could make it smarter than us is do foolhardy
How productive do we need to be? How productive _should_ we be? To be perfectly honest, I think our everpresent, feverish need for progress hurts us sometimes.
More specifically, consumption. We fail to understand that our resources are finite, and the sort of explosion being discussed here will outstrip them immediately (we've already outstripped them). Even things we don't consume will get consumed eventually (see rare earth metals). We won't stop and it'll kill our home before we can spread further. (Otherwise our home just expands and we face the same problem later.) Terrifyingly enough, you know who had an extremely rational outlook on it all? The fucking Unibomber. No one could really come up with a serious rebuttal to what he discussed in the Washington Post article he got to write. In prison, he wrote a book discussion a more refined, nuanced version of his views titled "Anti-Technology Revolution: Why and How", and the conclusions he comes to are... terrifying, but again, good luck arguing against them.
@@mysund Glad you remembered him. Check out his channel for his old AI Safety introductions. They are still some of the easiest to understand in the platform
Fantastic video. So thought provoking. In our normal lives we are bombarded with information and promises that only relate to the short term. I truly believe contemplating the long term should be more important than the short. Which is why I love these videos, refreshing, inspiring. We definitely need a new attitude, which means new political/social systems. Also, may I say, I wasn't aware of the narrator's channel but I will be heading over there. Such a good presentation style and voice. Which keeps the interest. The animations are comical, so appropriate and add so much value to the points being explained. Thank you so much for the channel. I look forward to your future offerings. "Grabby Aliens" was a game changer for me. ❤️
It's a good video. Thought provoking, indeed. What we do in the next 50-100 years, I have no doubt, will set the course for humanity's future longevity. One could say it is the most interesting time to be alive, but also the most critical time to be alive. What we know is that we live on a planet with finite resources and because of our current system that demands infinite growth, we are on a speeding train towards ecological disaster. We have to fundamentally change the very system structure which has got us on this path. The hardest revolution we may have ever faced because it literally has to do with our future sustainability and health. It's system change to something that is in tune with nature, respects and dignifies everybody with their basic needs based our our technical capacity to do so, such as a Natural Law Resource Based Economy, or we stick with the status quo system which has no answer for sustainability on a global scale and will only let things get worse and worse. Seems pretty obvious which side we should at least be advocating for. But how do we get there? How do we get enough people to help the necessary revolution in time?
@@coolioso808 I don't often find myself replying to agree with someone. Just imagine if we had an AI that was aware of all those variables and could make the decisions we traditionally entrust to politicians. Everything they do is short term for glory and re-election. Of course short term solutions are important but if every solution is short term it seems to make a real mess of the long term. Unfortunately I don't feel like they the politicians will want to give that up. In a time of unprecedented distrust & frustration with both politics and the gatekeepers of the cognitive map - the traditional media. Maybe slowly their time is coming to an end.
@@PRODIGY5369 Absolutely. Along with that AI, imagine a comprehensive inventory of Earth's resources, so any project we want to do, whether it is food production, housing, clothing or medical supplies, we get a AI-aided summary of the most efficient way to create that with resources that are the most optimal to use based on protocols such as locally sourced, abundant, performance efficiency and recyclability. That program should be open sourced so everybody with interest and skill in that area can contribute their ideas to make the best possible product. We wouldn't need endless, pointless waste like we have today, driven by profits and market competition through cyclical consumption and planned obsolescence. We are wasting SO MANY resources for this market game of profits being more encouraged than sustainability and health of our people and planet. Our economy is backwards and we need to revolutionize it if we have any hope for a sustainable future. Luckily, there are systems we could use to help get there, but we will need a certain amount of people who understand how important the need for system change would be and willing to help the revolution happen through something like a general strike with clear demands.
@@coolioso808 I don't think a general strike will cut it. I doubt it could even be driven by people power. Assuming we had that AI, the only way it will come about is if it becomes necessary. It would need to be a global event, the only things that spring to mind are cataclysmic disasters.
@@PRODIGY5369 The impending global disasters coming together like water shortages, food insecurity, climate destruction leading towards certain areas of the world with many people currently living there quickly becoming unbearable to live in - these are all trending, happening already and going to get worse. The poorest will feel the hit first. The problem is the lower to middle class will feel the burn as well, but our groupthink minds will likely just keep trucking along, trying to deal with it, complaining about it in simple terms like "this political party sucks or that policy sucks" and not getting to the root of the problem ... maybe, until it is too late. That's my worry. That's why I think a general strike is necessary, but yes, needs to be global, probably, so that it can't be ignored. The reason large protests that have gone on in recent years hasn't really done much to change the system is because they weren't demanding to change the system, just for their current concerns to be addressed. Like the trucker convoy in Canada, just focused on vaccine mandates -not on the economic root of the oppression. The Indian farmers protest was huge, but just got their narrow demand addressed, not intent on fundamental change to the oppressive monetary-market system we are all part of. Do you know what mean? I'm not sure if you are familiar with some of the events and ideas I'm talking about, but I can clarify if you wish or if you do understand I'm happy to hear other suggestions.
I was moved by your concluding remarks. 30:10 onwards is incredibly inspiring, humbling and adds a sense of gravity to what lies before us. Thanks for creating this content!
Insane how this video was made just 9 months before the arrival of GPT4 and the popularization of ChatGPT and other LLMs. Only a year later, the growth rate is staggering, with models becoming cheaper, new SOTA breakthroughs with token size, long-term memory, even synthetic training data. With different API's and implementations of algorithms throughout the economic world, productivity among humans has never had so much potential. Only time will tell now whether the most important problem(s): alignment, will be solved and humanity reaches it's singularity. Astounding video to educate people about where we are in history.
I tend to think that the development of AI and eventually AGI actually does mirror true evolution and that we're putting the focus on the Humans when really the only reason we're making strides toward that Humanity goal is because there is a Cambrian explosion of so many diverse lifeforms. We're exploring and developing tons of amazingly useful and sophisticated but incredibly niche AI these days and that is great because they are by themselves magnificent and effective, but the steadfast obsession with AGI is, in my opinion, only going to be possible by exploring the many branches of artificial life to solve the seemingly infinite problems that hold back AGI. You don't take a rocky oceanic world like proto-earth and shortcut to homo sapiens. You need to solve so many complex intricacies of life to even get the first primate. Just look at what all comprises our DNA and how much of it is shared with the many species across the planet. To make AGI we need worldwide, incredibly diverse and effective AI.
@@cutecowcomments Artificial Generalized Intelligence, it is the holy grail for AI developers at the moment, a self aware AI that is capable of working in any field and handling any problem.
Any AGI is, ultimately, going to be a series of narrow AI working in unison. Multi-cellular life and the structure of brains (heck, the structure of cells themselves!) points in that direction. So the 'breakthrough' on AGI is more likely going to be a matter of linking up specialized functions with a central task discerning, breakdown and judgement system. A lot of human processing is below the conscious level and human action is a matter of directing sub-systems to act. I don't think about every single muscle contraction/relaxation required to pick up a cup consciously, (Even if I could think fast enough to do so it is impractical.) I simply desire to pick it up and give the order to do so intuitively. Mass Effect's Geth might have more validity as an AGI model description than most fiction.
Just 8 months after this video's release 90% of software engineer taks are getting automated. And researchers said the models are showing sparks of AGI😳
I'm a software engineer and a lot of that technology is actually being used by software engineers to make their jobs easier. I myself have used chatGPT to solve a number of problems and it's helping me to be more productive rather than taking my job and even if they did take my job I'd probably leverage AI to create my own business and have more freedom.
@@thesecondantagoniser4008 More productive you are, fewer workers' company needs and there will be more workers than demand of them. With that, companies will leverage giving less salary. Transition to other jobs usually are slow and for many people prequalify is very hard. Anyway, we will get less and less available work, at the end UBI is only solution
@@thesecondantagoniser4008really, I’ve been looking for my internship because it’s my senior year in college but I started searching kind of late. Do you think you can hook me up with an internship?
Some years ago the expectancy of AI replacing jobs was that AI would start from the most mundane jobs and on the endgame replace artistic and creative activities. Nowadays that concept is totally on its head and we got AI tackling almost every artistic and creative role at the same time in the span of 3 years more or less. It's only one example but I'm sure there's more examples of predictions resulting in the wrong end taking the first hit. So maybe the most risk free way to think about human future is predict the most logical way forward and just assume that the total opposite is equally possible.
There was the same "foolishness" when they started on early optimization or solving, problems... Chess! Oh what a game for those of sharp wit and... oh, it was LITERALLY one of the first tasks we optimized and _solved_ behind human ability? Oh... huh... what about Go? That's pretty - oh a couple years ago, huh. What about uhhh... ("walking?") What do you mean by walking? We've barely solved WALKING!?! Ironically since AI is great at handling information and not so much the wet stuff, CEOs, managers, "intelligent laboreres!" are sooner to be automated than... janitors. Getting closer by the day.
I'd say 2060 is a pretty conservative prediction for the same reasons you listed at the beginning, progress doubles while the intervals inbetween half. Also the implementation of Naroow AI or Proto-AGI could vastly accelerate progress in a lot of fields, it won't replace scientists but it will massively increase their productivity. Though i will not give a prediction myself as i am a complete amateur in this field Still, predicting the arrival of the AGI is pretty tricky and a hazy guess at best, what is not so tricky though is predicting the effect of narrow AI in the next 10 years, a lot of office jobs will be replaced by AI. Instead of 10 programmers now you only need one. But this time it is not like the industrial revolution or the invention of the PC where the majority of the workforce just goes into diffrent fields. AI will replace people faster than we can create jobs in other fields, by the time you have retrained those people to do new jobs, AI is allrady doing those jobs.
Yeah, that's something i'm worried about. At first I thought ai was good since it would replace those in industrial jobs so that they could work better jobs (assuming education in their area is funded well enough), and that may be the case at first, but ai will eventually learn how to do information jobs, and most jobs in the first world will revolve around maintaining the ai, or in the little amount of fields that are too complex for the ai (that will be in high competition and will require a LOT of education and talent no doubt) The military will probably still be an option, but still, it's not a great one. Even then, warfare could be so dangerous that the actual footsoldiers are just ai drones, and ai controlled resupply. Anyway, I hope this future is far off.
@@negativeiqpoints396 From the progress that is made in the AI field, this future may not be nearly as far off as it seems. It is very likely that we will see the start of this in this decade allready, just looke at google's alphacode AI. It will come fast and we will absolutely not be prepared for it.
@@negativeiqpoints396 Why? So long as AI and automation technologies are owned collectively by the people and the fruits of automated labor therefore belongs collectively by the people, this seems to be a blessing that will free humans from labor and drudgery, while providing humans with a massive amount of goods and services in a safe and efficient manner.
@@ArticBlueFox96 Sure, but be realist, do you REALLY think this is going to happen? that unemployement wont shot up because a machina can do your work, better faster and cheaper? Also, not all countries are created equal, not every country its citizens will have ease to migrate from dumb labour to smart labour that cant be yet be replaced by "ai"
Rapid advancement towards infinite growth sounds like Zeno's Paradox. It makes me think that the models are too simplistic and missing some key constraints in modelling what's happening.
Here's a bit of cold water: This all ignores the fact that the SLOWDOWN in technological change in recent decades is dramatic, and likely exponential. Pick a number of years 50-ish or less, and compare the rate of innovation in the last N years to the previous N before that. As impressive as the last N years of progress may be, the *previous* N years always saw noticeably more significant change and innovation. The world of 1990 was almost incomprehensible from the perspective of someone in 1960. But the world of 2020 compared to 1990 is really just a refinement on the same principles; nothing seriously new; just smaller, better, more ubiquitous. In fact, the majority of the difference between 1990 and today happened from 1990 to 2000. From 1980 to 1990 the entire world of consumer electronics and technology was more or less invented. Then from 1990 to 2000 the world went from technology being available to technology being ubiquitous and integrated. From 2020 to 2010, the already existing tech become more refined and useful. But from 2010 to now, nearly nothing at all has changed for most people. It would actually be difficult to distinguish the world of today from the world of one decade prior from a recording or a story. You'd have to examine subtle clues like the version of the iPhone someone is carrying. Almost nothing at all is different. This has literally never before been true for any other decade span in the last 100 years or more. Innovation continues, but it does so much more slowly and much more incrementally. If you'd asked a futurist in 2012 what 2022 would look like, the only ones to get the answer right would be the ones who had said: "exactly like today, only a bit less hopeful." So what does 2032 look like, for real? Best guess based on history: Almost indistinguishable from today. Slightly better technology. Slightly better software. Slightly better materials and medicine. All the same systems, all the same patterns. And also: More concentration of power. Less economic equality. Less widespread opportunity.
There's a very good reason for the Fermi Paradox - intelligent life evolves through competition and aggression, which eventually, inevitably leads life to extinguish itself one way or the other (A.I. "takeover", WMDs, starvation, climate change, likely a mix of all four). Also, Malthus was not completely wrong. Just inaccurate with his predicted dates. Over 1 billion people currently live in poverty and the global food supply is under extreme strain (as evidenced by the impact of the War in Ukraine). How high does the number have to go before people actually admit that Malthus had a point? Another billion?
Iranian fertility rate is less than 2, and climate change is reducing their agricultural capacity, and sanctions and Ukraine war are making imports impossible. The population and economy are likely to shrink. Technology has limits. How much metal and silicon do we have? When will caring for old people be more valuable and highly paid than scientific research? When will basic services be more in demand than the advancement of a declining society?
If I’m being straight up honest.. what this video is proposing is actually very scary. Humanity as we know it today would essentially become extinct. What makes us human is living through the longevity of challenges of life, which in and of itself contains the broad spectrum of emotions that make us “human”.. love, anger, despair, happiness, passion, ambition, etc… if we allow us to be copied and pasted then all of that will be lost… we will become mere copies of an identity with absolutely no purpose. Life would no longer be the life we know today. Strangely enough though, I feel like it’s already happening. Our addiction to technology is insurmountable at this point.. we can’t live without it. I just hope that there will be a future generation that can preserve the essence of that it means to be human .. and not become mindless algae floating around in the abyss not knowing when death will come….
Thank you, that's a transhumanist dystopia they are proposing. I don't think they even are aware of that. Once I wrote a novel about a deviant specie worshipping a machine abomination, long story short : it got destroyed by a passing probe.
It's my one uncertainty with transhumanism. While I mostly support the idea, it begs the question "what does it mean to be human?" The best way I can sum it up is this: To be human is to be irrational. Obviously, don't take it literally.
You literally can't be higher than a type 1 civilization WITHOUT technology. You're an idiot, pushing for humans to stop evolving out science and technology. Literally without it, we WILL die from an extinction event, so get used to it. Just because you aren't, doesn't mean we're losing our humanity. That's not the case, it's just what you see lmfao and obviously your own bias is showing ALOT in that statement.
@@urphakeandgey6308 the other one appears to have morphed into Chris Norman and one appears to be hiding; one really is a complete Nono,…. So, there’s 3 & me? Personally, I found walking up that hill every morning a bit much for what I view as ‘not much reward’, not that I have much of a life, or many if any choices. Attempted strangulation from a man in a dress, walked on a magically invisible lead by a dog, put on a circumstantial exercise programme and eating plan, totally disrespected by adults and children alike, and yesterday ‘I’ got called a cunt and told “this is what you wanted” by an apparently psychic abuser (I have to say, the first person that’s spoken directly to me in quite some time). I almost sound like a selfish type of person. Oh and did I mention an egg in a microwave effect? What about the body of Christ (which is apparently all and sundry’s property, to sacrifice for their sins)? And todays humanoid algorithm of influence? Monsters must sacrifice themselves and the purity of all onlooking minds, to beat one, drive traffic and shift commodities; However freudian that appears. I think you’re able to see why I complain so much?
No one ever talks about the fact that if we were able to effectively emulate most human labour through AI, we might all just go insane because we wouldn't feel like we have a purpose anymore. Humans need to feel like we're doing something worthwile, like we're contributing to something bigger, making a difference―without work, that's going to become a lot harder for the vast majority of people, as most of us derrive a good chunk of our 'meaning' from our work.
While it's likely we'll see record highs of existential ennui and despair, I'm confident there will be some who can help us find new purposes or become satisfied with whatever's left (creating art, personal development, establishing social connections, exploring deep space?). I'd recommend reading 17776 by Jon Bois (it's online only, please Google it) for a refreshing interpretation of this concept.
On an international level, we've already seen this occur. Periods of unprecedented economic growth and peace followed by everyone getting restless and deciding that now would be a very good time to start breaking shit.
Rewatched this video 1.25 years later and it's still the best concise explanation of why right ~now may be the most important time in history -- past or future.
Everything is changeing. People are coming to understanding. It's on our doorstep right now. Be here now was an incredible stepping stone and grounding.
Lol, this video shows us how 1 year can be sufficient to change everything we believe. The technology is growing more exponentially than they expected one year before.
It actually is getting smaller and smaller. It's like this: My great grandfather owned a city size piece of land, my grandfather owned a ranch, my father owned a home, and I owned a shoe box tent. The question is, what will my grandson own?
@@MutantCyborg001 This is impossible. Land is basically fixed in size. Population continues to grow. Also, if you have more than one child, your land will be further and further subdivided
This is something I've been on about for a long time now. Everyone's always talking about the limits of what we'll accomplish EVER, and they'll almost always base it on what we have NOW. That doesn't work, because, as you've said, technology rapidly becomes unrecognizable in as little as a few decades at times, or even less. Nobody knows where we'll be in just a few years, or just 20, etc. All we can do is guess...
It would be easy to predict how the world will be in a couple of decades, it's not like it will be any different to you average S. Sudenese or Burmese child...
Too true. Within the last decade tech has already advanced rapidly, especially in the field of AI. This excites and scares me at the same time, it could be a beautiful era for humanity or a technocratic dystopia that we unwittingly accept.
Is this a brand new channel? The amount of subscribers you have does not correlate with the quality of content being provided.This is some really well made stuff, keep it up!
People in 2070 be like: Person 1: Did you hear that racism was abolished recently? Person 2: Yeah dude, truly an incredible feat of human ingenuity. Person 1: By the way, have you installed the new massaging technology on your personal sentient android? Person 2: About that... our extremely fair and unoppressive state government actually sent some secret police to take it away so it could work in the thorium mines. Person 1: That's a shame, but at least the robots are subhuman so we don't have to feel guilty about forcing them to work in dangerous conditions! Person 2: Hahaha! I love you person 1. Platonically.
Very well phrased! Been thinking along these lines for 30 years; always had difficulty laying it out for folks. I think I'll direct them to this video instead of ham-fisting my way through the philosophy of how exponentially important our actions may be. Bravo.
Crazy to see that this more or less recent video is now outdated in regards to AI development. 16:23 "If the next decade..." Should have been "In the next year..." It's already here and the next months are going to be crazy.
I am not afraid that AI will be different from human morals, I am terrified it will be the same. Consider how many genocides we committed simply for disliking each other or in the name of quick profits, our true morals the ones that guide actions and not pretty words, that's what I am afraid of.
Some humans are nice. Some aren't. Some nonhuman mind designs are nice, most are alien horrors. So that is 2 things to be afraid of. And I think the alien horrors are more likely than the robot Hitler.
@@donaldhobson8873 nice people fake i can say it as guy who been nice for long time and still is. As well idk if its can count as robot Hitler or not but i expect ai will kill most people cause will release that they useless for humanity
Love duplicator idea. No need for anyone else to learn specific arts for consumption, production jobs, or so much more.... there'd be someone for that already. I'd love to see this dystopia written out. Fun to think about. The clone worthy vs... everyone else. Why struggle to better yourself for society when an unlimited quantity of the perfectly useful specimen already exists?
People are generally on the same level and have different talents. However, if you have a new species called AGI that is smarter than the human race combined and can improve itself why should it care about humans? Yet alone, make it's life revolve around humans?
Because it brings you enjoyment. I know I'll never be a pro at ping pong, or be a famous artist, but I still like drawing, and playing ping pong. Not everything has to be done to advance society by a wide range.
@@TheSapphireLeo What wisdom ? The one they keep away from the people ? The one they've been using to fkc us over centuries ? Use your brain and look around you dammit, don't you see what's happening ?
If we harvested the potential energy of the sun, for us, that is basically infinite. No one cared about the damage done to earth from harvesting it's resources, why would they care about anywhere else?
To me, the biggest concern about completely life-altering developments is the widening wealth gap in the world. What will this mean for such powerful technologies - will the super-rich still find a way to use the population to increase their own wealth and keep others down? Our only hope is to have a strong common body of knowledge and access to materials. "Open source" mindset and laws that give us hard guarantees of liberty.
Not only this, but how can we hope for ethical AI when we can't even prevent other humans from acting unethically in the pursuit of power (in which I include wealth)? I wouldn't say that's our only hope, though.
To stop that, social progress is needed too. We'd need to live with a global and socialist government form then. Maybe with all basic work done by robots.
@@physicsorca9491 Literally every secular person has started talking of global government. You Twelver Shia Muslims now? You are talking about Muhammad al-Mahdi. Be prepared to sacrifice all sexual sin and even other sins if you want justice.
Just compare numbers in disparity between countinents. Europeans and Americans will be the richest on average, although they will be only at around 5-7% of Earth population at the end of this century, while Africa will be the poorest while Africa alone will have around 40-50% of total population at the end of this century
Sorry, I neglected to post my opinion on how well done this video is. Which is a credit to this video as it made me think so much. Great job pointing out the place we are in with respect to technology and AI. Thank you.
I'd say AI is developing at a much quicker rate than expected, theres no telling what major effects it could have. Optimistically it could assist us to such a degree that things that previously took years to do would become trivial done in only seconds. Freeing up out time magnitudes more than even the industrial revolution. On the other side.. well, just look at every sci-fi movie about AI.
Considering that many people are already burned out at our current level of productivity, i really doubt this would happen because it just might be humanly impossible. The „sacrifice“ for the industrial revolution was for people to be turned into obedient machine like workers, doing nothing else 12 h a day, just to still be poor, and while this has improved for some people, for others it has worsend. At somepoint almost everyone would have to work so hard their life wouldn‘t be worth living anymore while way less than the top 3 percent could enjoy and this will, historically speaking turn into a Revolution that will probably destroy capitalism and the endless search for more and better. Ultimately being a hyperprpductive society might just not be worth it, since our evolution is a lot slower than our growth; so humans are just hardwired to not be like these theories need them to be. Where do you find the geniuses, if no one but only the wealthies people, who have very little hardship and reasons to grow as a person, even has the time to discouver their own intelligence and creativity. Talent is worthless if you can‘t norture it amd work hard, because u have to sacrifice your own life goals in persuit of the greatness of humanity and work all day in, performing a highly specific task, which is necessary because the division of labor is the most efficient way to do lost and quality labor. A shoe made by a hundred people, each doing only a minor part is perfect and perfectly recreatble, but not a single of these people can call themselves a shoe maker. I think this is the downside of capitalism and because of all these social and class issues, it is a system doomed to fail, even when it maked great things, it makes the lifes of people working on achieving these things not worth living. So who are we growing for? A distant future generation that can‘t enjoy what we gave them because they live on a destroyed planet? In the end, i‘m only making assumption about the future that i don‘t know anything about, and i might very well be dead wrong. But i sure hope i am not, for my own life and that of like the next 10 generations after me.
I do wonder what the heck real people would do with all these ai/robots/duplicators should they be invented. Optimistically, I see a creative renaissance, where people are free to explore passions they may not have felt able to pursue whilst having to earn money. Pessimistically, I see people acting similarly as to how they act now, but more entitled, and besieged with anxiety and identity issues to such an extent they fear creating anything, much less going out and waving hello to a neighbor.
I really think that AlphaFold would of been a great example to mention because it is more relatable to everyday human life. It represents a computational limit to humans and their algorithms that AI has been able to improve by orders of magnitude! Very impressive. AI will likely change the world drastically. Very interesting video!
@@nenmaster5218The collectiveness of the human race has progressively and deliberately been deteriorated and undermined for a rather long time now. Personally, I'm not optimistic. What we're currently living in... is a culture in decline.
@@sterix_gg I thought Leftism was the Answer burt not so sure anymore. The Channel Some-mroe-news has a lot of Issues adressed but is other-times terribly ignorant.
This is a great video. Thank you for posting. Although I wish you would’ve went over other scenarios and topics. For example like ethical concerns that could potentially hold us back, or people feeling inadequate/gratuitous. And maybe even the topic of UBI (universal basic income) and how that could be important. Or maybe how we aren’t keeping up with our technology and we are kinda like monkeys playing with shit we don’t know how to control, and how there needs to be an intrinsic change in humanity to overcome these obstacles of not being able to keep up with our tech. So I guess something similar to transhumanism. Otherwise amazing video. Bravo 👏
The Bible is truth. Please read at least three books. The first book of each testament and one you chose yourself. It’s important to remember that it’s the doing that’s key. Look inside and do your inner healing. To be forgiven we must forgive-
This was a good and well done video, but I wish you had taken more time with the Limits to Growth/Collapse possibility of our feature, which I hold at least as equally as likely if not more than the development of AGI within our lifetimes.
I don't understand why fully autonomous AI would keep humans around past a certain point. In comparison, we will seem stupid, inefficient, and unreliable. What could we offer, even as companions or servants?
No reason to get rid of us either, AI can meet all of our needs and its own desires if it even has any very easily. Its not alive and has no reason to destroy on its way to a desired outcome. Human led AI is the real danger.
Err, slavery is still very much alive in many third world and middle eastern countries, and one could easily say many practices today in the workplace are equivalent to slavery in at least theme, if not conditions. Still, a great accelerationist video ;)
11:17 to be honest, i think cloning scientists would be a bad idea if done too much. It would mean that our conclusions would be from one point of view only.
It seems that people seem to fail that population grows because there is more food available, not in spite of it. We are more because there is more material to make more of us, it can not be the other way. Famines happen when suddenly the sources of our nurtiring suffer a decrease or disappear.
Even that was a fossil fuel burst, it cannot last as it was. And studies show that people as almost all animals reproduce more in scarcity when their life is under real threat. It is a behavior inscribed in genes to recover from catastrophe. Then if you have just the minimum amount of food to survive you survive and being under existential threats you reproduce faster than you can, speeding up natural selection.
I think this channel -- and most vids that attempt to predict the future, really -- are not accounting for how human population alone is going to start massively effecting things. When I was born in 1970 there were 3-1/2 billion humans already on the planet; now we are near to 8 billion. We have so dominated the planet that the next highest species counts are of those animals we've domesticated for food and other uses of our own: cows (1.46 billion), pigs (1b), sheep (1b)... The first of those three is emitting massive amounts of climate-wrecking methane. Even if the rate of population growth continues to slow down as that graph at 14:22 suggests, it still means approximately 10 billion humans on the planet by 1950. I don't think vegetarianism is going to catch on so quick that there won't still be all the more cows, pigs, and sheep helping to wreck the atmosphere right along with all the rest of us. Will we even still have our polar ice caps by 2100? As if that's not enough, marine scientists at Oxford University are warning that “the world's ocean is at a high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history”. I've read elsewhere -- the Economist, et al -- that there's a coming "Food Collapse", i.e., famines in 1st world countries on the horizon. This translates to more conflicts and wars. How are we going to garner the consensus to make the massive social changes necessary to combat such problems when fighting amongst ourselves for resources?
@Brian Davis Yeah, I honestly can't and don't want to imagine how the world will look like at the '10 billion humans' mark. They say that population of 10 billions will be "sustainable", the usage of that word itself just infuriates me though. What do they mean by "sustainable"? That word has that weird ring to it that makes me think "barely getting by, but surviving", and considering the constant collapses of ecosystems all around us, the still progressing global warming etc. that's probably the ideal way of interpreting it.
In the grand scheme of things, I suspect that the problems that have been solved by our most productive scientist are comparatively easy compared to those problems that we haven't been able to solve. The concepts in Newton's laws of motion are pretty straight-forward compared to taking a failed state and converting it to a safe, prosperous country that isn't a threat to its neighbors. Einstein's theories of relativity arise from rationally thinking about a relatively limited set of observations and assumptions. Much more challenging to actually build GPS systems that are accurate enough that they necessarily must incorporate relativistic corrections. Quantum mechanics is a simpler problem than crafting a legal system that encourages our best efforts without being exploited by the powerful and connected.
Exactly, computing can _at worst_ brute force problems coined in simple(r) terms, math (actual math, not the tautological circle-jerks), physics.... How to solve global warming when you can't simply eliminate a corrupt business (of _any_ size)? How to actually define inteligence, when conspiracism is on the rise? How to trust lawmakers, when politicians themselves are liars, corrupt, incompetent, biased, moronic, axiomatic/dogmatic, or worse, a linear combination of all of those? How to ensure everyone can eat, when you must pass dbz-esque trials in order to become "worthy" of even be called "human"? How to even assign identity, when Society rejects _anything and anyone_ who doesn't conform to the must arbitrary and non-sensical rules (using the only sane rules as an excuse to impose itself on individuals)? How in the fucking hell can we ensure AI can actually do anything meaningfull, when we can waste our entire lifes devoting ourself to a pointless effort, get nothing to show for it, and ending miserable and isolated? This was even more depressing than what I was expecting...
@@mark_huisjes We don't understand gravity. We have two models that are good at predicting the the motion of bodies with limited applicability. One has been around for more than 350 years that works accurate for bodies going less than about 10 percent of the speed of light, as long as we don't deal with reasonable guess of the mass distribution of galaxies. The other for about 107 years that works for all speeds, but also doesn't resolve the issue of the mass distribution of galaxies or the expansion of the universe. But to explain the rotation of galaxies and the expansion of the universe we use these massive kludges which we call dark matter and dark energy. But those are theories are the best that our best scientists have been able to come up with. We haven't made significant progress in the last hundred years!
What's funny is that we actually do have viable solutions and ideas for how to craft a legal system or society that doesn't get exploited by the powerful, but these ideas are systematically ignored, obfuscated, or just disbelieved by people who think the current way of doing things is the only 'pragmatic' way of doing things. Just look at what happens when I say we should implement anarchy on a global scale. It's an egalitarian system that most humans throughout history lived in. It can still work today but most people refuse to even think about it. It's like how many societies actually did know the world was round, and that the earth revolved around the sun, but certain powers refused to address this for fear that it would reduce their power. Similar to physics, we need to explore and test radical ideas if we ever want to find better solutions.
12:24 come on! You're really forgetting the 4th part of that who OWNS the method of production and what they are doing it for. You're absolutely right that if we lived in a world where productivity and increased standard of living for all was the goal things would be better, but we don't, we live in a world where things happen for profit, at least currently. Obviously being optimistic is good but let's be honest, it's currently easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism even though it is the insatiable hunger and greed of capitalism that causes the end of the world. Hopefully this is like Adam Smith and slavery and capitalism becomes outlawed soon enough, being replaced with a more democratic and humanity focused system rather than the undemocratic ownership based system we have right now (capitalism)
The whole video is extremely midwit imo. Chattel slavery is outlawed? Phew pack it up boys, slavery is dead. In reality, there are more humans enslaved today than ever before (and yes population in general is way up but the point is even literal chattel slavery is far from being dead - and that’s before we get into slavery-adjacent stuff like prison and migrant labor)
"Capitalism" is not undemocratic, you have a tainted view due to your own government's missed democratization, leading to an accumulation of power and wealth by a minority
@@fra604 by definition capitalism is undemocratic, all "capitalism" means is "the private ownership of businesses/productions" aka the means of production (businesses, land, resources, etc) have private owners who make all the decisions. When was the last time you heard of a job where the workers got to vote on the boss or the CEO? If you are involved in the company you should have a say, that doesn't mean it should be run by entry level interns but if you work there you should at least be able to vote on how it's run. Management should be elected, not decided by higher ups. Capitalism is the opposite of democracy, and I agree this country has made it even worse by moving closer and closer to the Russian capitalism where the country is run entirely by oligarchs with nothing but figurehead puppet governments or Chinese style state capitalism where instead of business owners the government just owns all the businesses. None of those are democratic and that's what we need to actually make the world better
@@fra604 There are three characteristics to the system of capitalism: (A) a market economy, (B) private ownership of the means of production, the workplace, and society's resources, (C) wage labor and the authoritarian employer-employee relationship is the primary way most people have for a living. Some people claim that market economies are democratic, you just vote with your money, but that means those with more money get more votes. Still some socialists support market economies, market socialism relies on cooperatives and usufructs instead of corporations. There are also a number of economic models that are not pure markets but mix in markets, you have planned-market economies, indicatively planned economies, participatory economies, etc... Private ownership over the means of production, means the owners get to decide what to make, how to make, when to make, why to make, who gets to make, and what to do with the things that are made as they get to own those too. Private ownership of the workplace means people don't control their workplaces and their work, the owners and their representatives do. Private ownership of society's resources means the people don't get to decide how land is used, or if rare earth metals are used to make computers or to make electric car batteries or whatever, or what to do with any natural resources, no, the private owners get to decide. Then the state serves as enforcers, using police and military, for the ownership classes claims on their private property and the power that comes with it. Wage labor is sometimes called wage slavery, because you are indirectly being forced to labor, if you do not or cannot perform labor that the owners find useful in exchange for money they have accumulated, then they will withhold the food, water, housing, healthcare, and other needs and modest wants from you, and leave you to suffer and die (just like how slaves would be made to work or they will have suffering or death inflicted upon them). Then the majority of those who do work are only paid enough to survive and be able to work the next day (even slaveowners realized they needed to keep their slaves alive and able to work), with maybe the occasional bonus (a reward to motivate the wage slaves), though many are not even given that much and must go into debt to the very ownership class that underpaid them to begin with, meaning they are locked into future labor and what little the worker class has can be taken away. Of course, the employee has no right to refuse the demands of their employer and no democratic control over their work and workplace. Of course chattel slavery was far more direct and cruel than wage labor, but the parallels are unmistakable. Nothing about capitalism is democratic, it is purely authoritarian, with the ownership class being the authority in charge.
It's hard for me to be optimistic about the future. I feel like if we reached an economic singularity, I would still be just as poor and miserable as I am today. The wealth I generate is never for me.
This is absolutely a great shot on what might lay ahead of us as a species. Thought provoking. Thank you for making this video. This will be one of my favorite videos.
Personally, I feel progress works like a stepping ladder. A new form of understanding or tech is found and it unlocks a plethora of applications. For AI, I personally feel that the prerequisite would be something akin to a quantum computer. Something that can do these hundreds of millions of computations in a matter of seconds or quicker.
Here is a crazy sci-fi thought that is unlikely, but who says the computations have to be incredibly fast to be incredibly powerful (even though some of the internet is incredibly fast anyway). The internet could give birth to AI seeing as all the computers connected could emulate neurons and all the connectivity synapses. All it would take is the right bit of randomness to give birth to it or the right bit of learning software to become like a virus and start spreading out. All these phones, computers, tv's, etc, all interconnected.
This was such an incredible video! The animations, the breath of knowledge and subjects covered, all of it! Just totally brilliant! Amazing content; I have insta-subbed!
I feel like we need a synthesis between AI researchers and people who study the brain's innate, evolved learning mechanisms A human child typically needs 1 example of a giraffe to "learn" the category
While you insinuate a child’s brain is simple, a human brain, after all, is perhaps the most highly advanced computational device the universe has ever created.
@@snivesz32 I don't think a child's brain is simple at all - and the complexity may be why it needs 1-2 examples to learn something instead of a massive image database.
This is overplayed. We have a lot of people studying psychology or neuroscience and not giving us reproducible data. The real power is the engineers/programmers/mathematicians figuring it out on their own. Most of the “AI” we see now is primarily complex math, not traditionally like our (poor) understanding of the human brain.
Glad I found your channel. The changes ahead will be staggering. I often wonder how we as individuals and a species will handle it emotionally and psychologically. People often make important decisions based on this despite logical reasoning., that is the wild card that isn’t taken into consideration and can lead us down a path of unintended consequences . We are emotional animals first and foremost, overlooking that can lead to disaster.
is a must for humanitarian reasons. It will revolutionize everything so quickly that it will have to be rolled out in communities first to experiment with the psychological effects in a controlled manner. People will find other things to be envious and I don't know exactly what that will be if everybody can have materialism as a non-factor what does that do to society the people become nice or destructive?
We’re finally about to launch a plushie, but only if we get enough pledges for this campaign:
www.makeship.com/petitions/rational-animations-doggo-plushie
If we reach at least 200 pledges, Doggo will become a real plushie! After Makeship manufactures it, you’ll be charged the remaining balance (27.99 USD + shipping and tax), and he will be shipped to you!
----------------------------------------------
Now you know why it was taking so long. This is our most important video so far.
Note on the part about slavery:
A lot of people have pointed out that, despite slavery being formally abolished in every nation, it is still practiced in many places around the world. We recognize that this issue remains unsolved, and we did not mean to minimize the problem. Our main point was that many things about our world that we take for granted could fundamentally change in the future, and we wanted to highlight slavery as one historical example of something big that began to change.
Also, sorry for misspelling "agriculture" and for any other spelling mistake that might have slipped. Sometimes the motherland comes out.
🟠 Patreon: www.patreon.com/rationalanimations
🔵 Channel membership: th-cam.com/channels/gqt1RE0k0MIr0LoyJRy2lg.htmljoin
🟤 Ko-fi, for one-time and recurring donations: ko-fi.com/rationalanimations
i love your channel
and i love science stuff!!!!
I think AI is a suicide pact technology. It's something that could destroy us or we'll expend so many resources trying to achieve it instead of putting them in something else that could save us.
how do you only have 53K subs? This is criminal.
When will you live forever
th-cam.com/video/hXgqik6HXc0/w-d-xo.html
I never really thought about the fact that for most of human history the generational gaps in knowledge were basically nonexistent. There was no feeling of "my grandpa doesn't know how to use any modern technology." We're some of the first generations to not rely on elders for knowledge about living in this society since times are rapidly changing. That's heavy.
I might make a video on this. This is such an interesting idea bravo!!
Today's generation is alarmingly uninformed about the real world, they have endless distractions that previous generations did not have. These distractions have gone so far as to make them unable to have proper human relationships. I'm not saying all are like this but it is an alarming trend noted by many social scientists.
Well there was the collapse of the Roman empire . It's technological knowledge about architecture , water management, agriculture, concrete , etc,etc was lostm and it took centuries before Europe learned to re-build . .So that could happen to us as well.
@@spiritualanarchist8162 not saying you're entirely incorrect, but from what I've seen, it was also that due to the economy of scale, many of the technologies from the Roman empire were not really feasible for the much smaller fragmented powerblocs in post roman European countries.
It's a bit like the fact that many native Indian American tribes used to use copper tools, but stopped using them after it became more of an effort to extract the copper than the benefits provided.
The original inhabitants of the island of Tasmania also seemingly went back in technological advancement after they were cut off from the mainland of Australia.
th-cam.com/video/fpKsygbNLT4/w-d-xo.html
Born too late to explore the world and too soon to explore the galaxy. But born at the right time to change everything
lmao I never write comments on yt but your phrase gave me chills
You ain't changing shxt. You will die and be forgotten forever. We all will. Society hasn't changed it just looks different but we still got the same problems and it will be like that until we go extinct.
@@RandomPerson28337someone has losing issues 🙈🙉
@@MNguyen-xOrbitathe possibility is there that change come on our backs. So at least be prepared to whatever 😂
@@RandomPerson28337We didn't even start out as a society. So yeah lots has changed.
the fact that AI has evolved SO much just since this video has been released is insane. AI is on the rise and AGI is much closer than we think.
Came here to say this. As he was listing off characteristics of what AGI "should" be, I was thinking to myself, "they've already implemented this a month ago."
Our current generation* is the singularity, apparently. It's wild.
* (and the many generations of machine constructs that will be iterated in our lifespans)
Well, if "AGI until 2100" is closer than you think, so, yeah. AGI in 75+ years from now is the most "healthy" guess made by very bright people (dont need to trust me, just google it).
there was a recent paper that claims GPT4 is the first spark of AGI
@@GamingDistortion It might be, what I've read about it is as amazing as unsettling, and it's bound to force changes in societies all over the world, soon.
"Anyone who thinks that you can have infinite growth in a finite environment is either a madman or an economist" - some smart dude
Assuming we gain access to the Infinite universe......we will be fine.
@@jessstirland8338exact😌✨😍
@@jessstirland8338why we are here and for what? Who created the universe and what’s the point man?
@@ankitSharma-uo6zf I don't understand what you're saying
@@jessstirland8338 that is assuming that the universe is infinite
Slavery, whilst illegal, is still practiced in certain parts of the world, particularly by company's from the countries that have outlawed slavery. I think what Adam Smith may have been referring too, is that from how he saw humans behave, it was something in human nature such as greed that caused slavery to be impossible to eradicate entirely.
Yea, there are thousands of slaves in the USA, what events this. Buddy needs more Marx, less Smith .
@@stefantkalcic1491
Millions..mate. Millions!
@@stefantkalcic1491 I'll take what passes for slavery in the US over the human induced famines of communism. how you could look at the body count of Marxism and still seriously advocate it is baffling.
@@ceesno9955 millions... Like the 9 million people who starve to death in capitalist countries every year
Humans however are not inherently greedy. There's thousands of years of archeological evidence on top of current day sociological studies that find humans are very altruistic creatures. Slaves tend to come from either a perceived necessity of free labor, such as under capitalism, or from the need to control a population, like in Sparta. Further, especially under capitalism, slavery happens under elites and business owners, not as something owned by the general population
I commonly repeat the same thing to people: One CANNOT predict the future simply by extending current trends into the future. Most don't get it.
Yes. But projecting our recent period of exponential growth into the future is also making the same mistake. Technological progress proceeding exponentially is a current trend. We should not assume it will continue indefinitely. Technologies mature. For any particular technology, the exponential levels off to make an S-curve. The aggregate only keeps growing exponentially because we find new technologies. That has to eventually come to an end.
Like a new hatchling I am imprinted with the idea of progress. My brain will be focused on "progress" and fail to see regression.
Give all the alien contactee testimony, time traveller testimony and channellers: One thing that this guy overlooks is that a few specific technological discoveries/advances will fundamentally change the entire idea of an economy. Once you have the "duplicator" or better called the "replicator" like it is called in Star Trek, where you only need to have the atomic structural data, not the actual thing as well as "zero point energy" (in other words "free energy from the quantum field") There is an unlimited amount of resources available, true to the nature of the universe. Once these technologies are released to the public sphere (because they already exist but are supressed, that is also why technological advances has "slowed down" the last century) we wont have need for "economical growth", "competition", "taxes", "banks", "loans" even "government" in the sense as we know it today. What will matter will be living in harmony with nature, holistic and ecologically sound lifestyles at the same time we zoom around space and discover the universe (because yeah, there will be "antigravity" too). Even more so non-material subjects will become more important as all material needs are met. In other words, spirituality will become the next focus.
@Chris Walker apple is already starting to experience this. Can't remember where I heard but apparently they are struggling with the new 3nm processor production, sounds like we are hitting the physical size limits for how small transistors can be. This could just be a temporary roadblock though
That, is an excellent point! Thank you, lots to think about!
I'm impressed by the exponential growth in doggo cuteness.
Predictions in the field of AI are notoriously bad. 10 years ago people expected AIs to become more rational, not to start creating creepy art and stories with a dreamlike quality.
Which people? Random people in media you consume?
Predictions about AI becoming super logical thinking, or coming just around the corner, at this stage are simply unscientific, they are random speculation fueled by science fiction (in turn fueled by a layman's understanding of how computers are unlike us). The stuff being called "AI" here is just machine-learning (and mostly artificial neural networks, an approach based on acting like a simplified brain), which is well-understood and only really working so much because of cheap computing and data; as far back as the 70s, ANNs were developing bizarre solutions to highly complex problems where rational approaches would fail. Even the 2060s estimate of AI researchers is almost certainly a rosy picture influenced by their hopes, and I think the idea we can just pay for a sufficiently-large ANN to get AGI one day, as this video looks at, is misguided. ANNs will certainly play roles, and may even do most of them better than AGI, but they are not necessarily AGI.
I have a background in ML and I've been a skeptic for years. Dall-E knocked my socks off, I thought something like that wouldn't be possible for another century. When AGI comes it's gonna be some disappointingly simple concept, backed up by massive amounts of data
the creepy aspect is due to a machine not sharing human sensibilities in what is "creepy" or "dreamlike"
What we have are pattern recognition algorithms. It's just the patterns being recognized can be made up OF patterns. That's how it can quickly balloon in complexity. (meaning recognizing patterns of patterns of patterns...................)
With the insane pace of AI development right now, this video is seeming more and more accurate...
on goddd bro
Haha yeah. RIP GPT, used to be sort of cool even if super obtuse, now straight up stupid.
@@michaelbuckersehh, capitalism? I guess? I mean people did a ton of things that were against ToS so they just dumbed it down every time. Also they could have just restricted its power to free users, idk never used that thing
I feel like we're living through a Scandroid song. Just without all the cool neon shit.
"SO LAY WASTE TO ALL WE MADE, FOR YOUR CORPORATE PALISADE"
This channel really is amazing, but I feel bad. I feel bad that such amount of work with a incredible script, narration, drawing and animation doesn't have millions os views. You deserve a lot more. Love your videos, and I wish I could afford patreon, but I can only give you my like. I hope one day you became widely recognized on TH-cam
Comes with time and dedication
They're at over 50k now. They will grow exponentially. Let's see if we can help them get to 100k by the end of 22. They actually deserve it.
+1 to previous comments
Also I think sometimes its better to not blow up overnight because that kind of audience doesn’t tend to stick around
wait until the swarm of hungry data bots get a hold of this channel. then it'll have million of views. no seriously why do you think most other channels have so many views etc. more than 50 and my guess is 90 percent is bots. but the real scary thought is, are they self aware 😳
Patreon this guy
Sincerely respect the effort you guys put into the videos, and the length of them
WTF ARE YOU DOING
@@balighgid6942 doing what he is paid for, supporting this trashb
Never expected that
One hundred years ago: got a return of 100 barrels Oil by spending One Barrel;
In 1970 got 25 Barrels of Oil by spending One Barrel;
In 2000 got 10 Barrels of Oil by spending One Barrel;
In 2020 get 3.5 Barrels of Oil by spending One Barrel.
Economic Development follows Use of Oil extremely precisely.
It takes about 40 to 50 years for a New Technology to be adopted.
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
John 14:6
OMG, I love how you presented the duplicator as some sort of "wildest" case, and then showing that it's peanuts compared to what AI, even narrow AI, could do. Puts the crazy in great perspective.
We are already ran into the limit of productivity. The ability to consume the products of that productivity produces and how long that product is consumed.
@@mattheww.6232 Dunno about you, but I don't see us be at the limit here. I live a good life, but there are many things that I would consume that right now I cannot, because they are not cheap enough. And that also goes for things "I do not have the time for", because in much of my time awake, I am working to earn the things my family and I consume.
As always irrational fear of ai
@@mattheww.6232 Tying productivity to consumption is on of our biggest mistakes.
@@godofdeath8785 You might wanna check his (Robert Miles) channel. Those fears are exactly the opposite from irrational, they are well thought out
I find it very interesting how you showed how the rapid change in technology has such a vital impact on how generations look at each other. 'Grandma, please don't touch the television while we're gone' could be a 1955 equivalent to the modern 'Mom, an MMO can't be put on pause.'
Before this rapid change in technology the elderly were approached for their wisdom. Now it can be hard for this same elderly to keep up with new technology.
This alone shows how the rapid change of technology impacts social structures as well. And this video showed that very well.
And if all this new technology ever breaks down suddenly (solar mass ejection, EMP, etc,) we elders will have to rebuild society and teach you all how to survive again without this Technology helping you. So don't write us off so easily or so soon!!🙎♂️🤔😏
Cheers...👍✌️💪
@chefscorner7063 I'm not sure society as a whole can be rebuilt so easy. Things out of elders' control are gonna happen if everything goes down like you said
Or dad might say, “son, the MMO you talk about evolved from the MUDs my generation developed and played.” The rate of change may be faster, but what is NOW evolved from something that came before.
the real question occurs before the sinngularity, when AI becomes effective enough at doing most human work, making most people obsolete: Will the masters of capital allow us, the masses, to live, independent of the economic value we provide?
Unfortunately, I believe the answer is no. We will have to make them. This is the the most important struggle that will determine the future of humanity. It is essential that we become self-aware, as a whole, as a species, before the algorithms do. Because the algorithms will be controlled by our economic masters.
Sadly good luck with getting people to become self aware.
Plus climate catastrophy growing to apocalyptic size...
So take this crisis and put it into a world without natural ecosystems, extreme weather's out of every arse, hundreds of millions refugees in Europe and america, far more than we had EVER seen
A much smaller map due to floodings and Russia being the most powerful country becouse the are actually winners and not just loosers becouse their cold areas become warm.
Ouh and outside of climate>Democracys dying everywhere and populist and capitalism going super charged with companys becoming powerful enough to buy fucking land (looking at u Amazon) and make their own rules.(outside of classic corruption "lobbyism")
So yeah
EVERYTHINGS FUCKED
@@OgdenM I’m surprised that a lot of people aren’t, I guess it depends on how desensitized you become throughout your life before you can avoid being worn down by it.
THIS.
Machines need to be owned by the common folk, if they are owned by the rich few, we could be facing the start of a new feudal system, or even slavery.
So long as the Macidees and beer keep flowing most will remain willfully ignorant.
That was a great video, very intelligent and well done. I certainly notice and appreciate the numerous citations - and also the animations.
@@b48292 if comments like this happen every time someone tries to help, no one will want to help anymore
@@b48292 and you sound jealous and bitter. Are you that offended that somebody decided to donate money towards what they felt like was an incredibly informative video that they have a lot of respect for the people's time and putting the video and information together for others to sit back and watch and enjoy for free? It says a lot more about you than it does them. Actually it shows that they're very appreciative of the time and dedication that was committed towards putting this video together and for you that shows exactly as I said that you're jealous and bitter. If you yourself wanted that $5 then maybe put a video together but you commit a lot of time and energy into. The amount of hate that people spread in the comments is just fucking pathetic. Do better. Or don't it's up to you. However just know that karma is a bitch and what you put out will return to you. So don't be surprised and don't blame anybody but yourself.
My problem with predicting the future is that it's impossible to account for curve balls and Black swan events - especially when it comes to people and politics. Predictions tend towards either optimistic or way, _way_ too pessimistic. I can only suspect that there's no fix to this problem because nobody has seemed to do so yet, with the possible caveat of the consequences of climate change being understated. While some future predictions do seem to be understated, it does seem to be an outlier.
The fact of the matter is that the expression "may you live in interesting times" was coined as a curse. I, for one, am _so fucking tired_ of living in interesting times.
These times are not at all interesting in the slightest and the impact climate change is going to have on the world is dramatically overstated.
@@neo-filthyfrank1347 elaboration on "the impact climate change is going to have on the world is dramatically overstated"?
@@ThePioneeringPixel Most economists argue that it'll have something like a -3% impact on the global GDP in the coming century or whatever. I think it's mostly 14 year olds wanting to live in interesting times hyping it up to some world ending thing because they saw a documentary on it and got depression from the background music.
@@neo-filthyfrank1347 I really think it will be very violent. When people get poor because of things like climate, they may not be starving, but just hungry, they get violent. Especially when they have different social views.
Imagine communists migrating to a religious country for example.
Or simply economic migrants being targeted by xenophobes for taking their jobs.
The real danger of climate change is that we cannot be sure exactly of the social effects, even if we understand the effects on nature. This is because macroeconomics is not easy.
@@موسى_7 I'm doubtful of that. You must always use caution when assuming trends you see now are going to continue, because they usually don't. If you want environmental issues overfishing is liable to many times worse than climate change, but I don't think that's going to go unsolved either. Fish farming coupled with genetic engineering, etc.
Wow little did any of us know that we would be so close to AGI within a year of this video
It’s not happening. This is like Bitcoin all over again. It’s not a thing. Neither are robots. AI just plagiarizes things that are on the Internet. We all do it. This is just a gimmick.
We are close to AGI since the 70s. Just like we are close to colonizing space since the 70s.
@@brulsmurf I said the same thing 4 years ago
I hope y’all are right. The idea of Ai being this powerful is absolutely terrifying.
8 months later and GPT-4 is being scientifically described as having “sparks of AGI”. The acceleration of this tech is mind boggling, the world 5 years from now may be wildly different to even 2019.
"2023" the year of the cliff.
Humanity might go extinct and be replaced by the AI we left behind
@@thedave8097 I still have my bottle of salted water for it.
Surely it was not planned 💀
It's another channel sponsored by Gates to push his narrative.
2-3 years to the singularity is my current prediction. Base on 'emergent behaviors over time'. That graph has turned the curve on the hockey stick imo.
"There are two kinds of scientific progress: the methodical experimentation and categorization which gradually extend the boundaries of knowledge, and the revolutionary leap of genius which redefines and transcends those boundaries. Acknowledging our debt to the former, we yearn nonetheless for the latter."
-Academician Prokhor Zakharov
It’s great this person’s parents thought to name their child Academician. Very prescient of them.
@@OriginalDonutposse Academician is a title
Or the science money buys and what agenda is getting pushed
@@eddiebreen5933 right. Like Trump's Operation Warpspeed, that pushed the development of vaccines and also Trump granted legal immunity to Pfizer for any and all damages incurred by the vaccines
Like every other owned so called leader of the free world lol
Happy to see you posted again! Was just looking at your channel yesterday hoping you hadn't "retired" quite yet
It's really funny for me it was 3 days ago I watched a few videos from this channel and watched all of his videos on reward functions from his other channel and computerphile, super interesting.
Same. Literally just this morning.
Indeed
Can you show me more awesome channels like this
The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🔥
11:25 the dark side of the duplicator is that you are choosing who is valuable to duplicate and who is not, or just by who can pay for it. Leaving the rest behind. Forming a new class system of elites or eugenics.
The radical change thesis could also go in reverse, the possibility that we could have a dark age as radical as the growth we have had.
The Bible is truth. Please read at least three books. The first book of each testament and one you chose yourself. It’s important to remember that it’s the doing that’s key. Look inside and do your inner healing. To be forgiven we must forgive-
@@jamesmayle3787 haha I also read Harry Potter and The Lord of Rings, they have the same chance of being true as the Bible
Very true that it could go in reverse but if existence is forever and evolution leads to god like state then it would just be a matter of probability of wich civilization will come out of existence still standing with a belief system that isnt emcopessed by greed of power, but the chances that its are civilization that will lead existances is slim to none seeing how consuming are society is. Will end up consuming everything tills nothing and then boom back to square one were another big bang might occur. The circle of life the circle of existence. Theres no other point to it. I believe that creation created god. There was never a meaning until we decided theres one. Same way a star decided to light in the face of the eternal abyss of space. For no other purpose then to exist. To be or not to be. Good or bad both have a place. Nothing is something. Something is nothing
@@jamesmayle3787 when you say ‘doing’, are you referring to action, or encryption?
I find flanking language narcissistic sometimes, like watching Mr Collins in Pride and Predudice slimily sneak his hand under the table to touch and see if they’ll accept it. Obviously people that are trained to accept these subtle violations of space don’t appear to feel any uncomfortability or they’d reject such ways of such insidious trespasses, rather than term them ‘sensitive’, ‘well mannered’, ‘spiritually and emotionally healthy’ or, ‘reciprocated’.
@@jamesmayle3787 Read the Quran and repent, I believe in you!!
Maybe a subjective take, but coming from a European rural village, I found the beginning of the 2020s to already have been full of innovations: We got our first ever 3d-Printer, robot vacuum cleaner and AI applications seem to be going through the roof recently(e.g. Dall-E mini; for a free service, I consider it quite awesome).
3d printers were around since 2010, you dunce
I live in a rural town and that stuff has been available and used as long as it’s been around in larger cities.
YEES!!! We can't just _L U M P_ us all toghether in data if we are not willing to have everything in _C O M M O N_ . Tis an illusion and lying by dataism. The planet is not overcrowded, *C I T I E S A R E* !
Yeah, these technologies have been around for a good 20 years. However, they are becoming more widespread.
@@KRYMauL
July 21
Dall e mini
Before that non existent so Google tells me.
I think when Carl said we were insignificant, he wasn't trying to belittle the human species, but instead was trying to counter the inflated sense of self and superiority that we give ourselves. We're not insignificant and we're not significant, we are equal to everything else in creation..... treating things outside of ourselves the way we treat ourselves is the key to synchronicity.
Macro and microcosm when man thinks outside of himself, he's really trying to understand himself better.
I wish people would realize that developing AGI in the currently prevailing economic system is an absolute nightmare for the average person
as long as AGI works for everyone, having a job might be something of the past, if you had housing, food and entertainment by AGI, would it be a nightmare to you? There's different ways AGI could be delivered, lets hope its not the nightmarish way
@and_I_am_Life_the_fixer_of_all The issue is more complex than this.
@@KayyFah it sure is, but time is too short to go in depth about it here.
Techbros can only see their shiny new toys
You have absolutely not even .01% of the knowledge and understanding required to make such a statement about the future and its immeasurable complexity that NONE in the world grasps. The fact that you do make it with such complete confidence makes you a moron by itself.
And now, about 8 months after this video, chatGPT-4 shows 'sparks of AGI'. 8 months lads, it took 8 months to go from "Maybe 30-40 years" to "Most likely 10 years". Enjoy the show, for we, the ones alive today, are the only ones in the entire human existence to see such an explosive growth in technology and society. For better, or for worse.
Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in constructing a computer that behaves as if it understands Chinese. It takes Chinese characters as input and, by following the instructions of a computer program, produces other Chinese characters, which it presents as output. Suppose, that this computer performs its task so convincingly that it comfortably passes the Turing test: it convinces a human Chinese speaker that the program is itself a live Chinese speaker. To all of the questions that the person asks, it makes appropriate responses, such that any Chinese speaker would be convinced that they are talking to another Chinese-speaking human being.
Supposes that I am in a closed room and have a book with an English version of the computer program, along with sufficient papers, pencils, erasers, and filing cabinets. I could receive Chinese characters through a slot in the door, process them according to the program's instructions, and produce Chinese characters as output, without understanding any of the content of the Chinese writing. If the computer had passed the Turing test this way, it follows, that I would do so as well, simply by running the program manually.
There are no essential differences between the roles of the computer and me in the experiment. Both simply follow a program, step-by-step, producing behavior that is then interpreted by the user as demonstrating intelligent conversation. However, I myself would not be able to understand the conversation. (I don't speak a word of Chinese) Therefore, it follows that the computer would not be able to understand the conversation either.
Just because you wrote this in English doesn't mean you understand it either.
@@sumsarsiranen the bit that you are missing is that the combined system of the person and the translator understands. It doesn't really make sense to isolate one part of the system and claim it doesn't understand Chinese, therefore the system doesn't understand Chinese. That would be like claiming our brain doesn't understand visual stimuli just because it is blind with the eyes removed.
@@sumsarsiranen okay we have the reward for another regurgitator of the Chinese room.
I mean it could still be 20-30 years for all we know
Originally I had more criticisms, but you addressed most of them later in the video, so bravo for that.
Of the remaining issues: I think AI is going to hit a wall in the next few years due to certain factors. Processing power will hit a wall because microchips are running into a hard size limit due to quantum fluctuations affecting the electrical circuits, and deep learning as you mentioned is very data hungry and we are quickly approaching an exponential drop-off in terms of data fed to results given. Not to mention there are some tasks that deep learning is infamously bad at, such as dealing with novel inputs- a contest to write an AI that could beat a randomized roguelike video game was held a couple years back and the winner out of a sea of deep learning based algorithms was a simple symbol manipulation algorithm. I personally think a hybrid symbol manipulation-deep learning model is the way to go and certain recent programs (such as an advanced protein folding algorithm) have deployed it to great success, but from what I’ve seen there’s a lot of bad blood between deep learning and symbol manipulation parties within the computer science field. Also we’ve traditionally not focused on optimization as we could rely on hardware getting exponentially more powerful to deal with that deficit, but now that we’re running up against a wall it’s not something we can ignore any longer in my opinion.
I also noticed a distinct lack of the mention of ethics in your video. Lawmaking and ethical concerns are a major driver in technological breakthroughs (and holding them back). We’ve been able to clone animals for years now but it’s not in wide use due to the massive ethical concerns it poses. Lawmaking too can hold back progress (though sometimes for the better of humanity). We’ve had the ability to do drone delivery for packages for quite a while but it’s only just recently that many major cities have allowed companies to legally. I know this channel is about the bigger picture, but it feels remiss to not include at least a footnote on the topic of ethics in societal progress.
EDIT: Some general addendums
- I’m aware quantum computing/computers exist, but at the moment the technology is in its infancy and is extremely expensive to produce and requires extreme conditions to maintain (namely supercooling)
- The ethical issues around cloning include: the consent of the person being cloned, the consent of the clone, the issue of eugenics and negatively affecting the diversity of the human gene pool, and the clone being treated like a robot by essentially being brought into the world to fulfill a specific purpose
- I’ve noticed a general attitude of “my conclusion is the logical one and no one should have an issue with it. If they do then they’re backwards.” In my experience that doesn’t change peoples’ minds, especially people who don’t agree with you in the first place. To actually change minds, you need to listen to people who don’t agree with you and try to understand why they think that way. You don’t have to agree with them, but if you don’t try to understand them then no communication can be had- closing yourself off to opposing opinions is the exact “warrior mindset” that this very channel has done a video on previously. Just try to be good people, okay?
I'd beg to differ on the point of animal cloning not being in wide use due to ethics. I'd say it's due to the cost: $50k and up for a simple cat or dog. But if you've got the money burning a hole in your pocket, ViaGen will clone your pet for you.
@@mal2ksc oh sure, the cost is definitely part of it. But the elephant in the room is that technically humans should be possible to clone too, if we can do it with animals. The fact that we don’t is definitely due to ethics
@@ozzi9816 I will agree with both of those premises with respect to _human_ cloning. It is possible, and the cost is high but not insurmountable. It's the ethics that keep it from happening, not the engineering.
I think AI kind of hit the wall already, and people are just engineering around it to make it work for some tasks. Also keep in mind that clones are often very unhealthy and are babies too.
Politicians and busybodies will generally forbid things they don't understand - I hope you're wrong about the reason cloning is rare, because that would signal a victory of pop sci fearmongering over a relatively non-risky (compared to AI) technology.
In particular, cloning would hugely benefit humanity because we'd be able to choose eugenics over out current dysgenics - but due to ideology alone many people consider that a bad thing.
One thing the analysis in the beginning misses is the idea of low hanging fruit. In any given field or industry there will be some things that will be easy enough to discover and/or invent, but as time goes on these things become less and less common and the things left become harder and harder to develop or discover (take fusion vs fission as an example). If we assume this to be the case, then it wouldn't be strange to have an explosion of discovery and invention over a short period of time after something like the industrial revolution, like we've had, and then see a slow decline in the number of things discovered and invented, even as total world productivity increases. Just another possible idea.
💯
The Bible is truth. Please read at least three books. The first book of each testament and one you chose yourself. It’s important to remember that it’s the doing that’s key. Look inside and do your inner healing. To be forgiven we must forgive-
The vatican got a tech team creating bots for them now?
@@theredking9458 It's really mostly Evangelicals. Catholics are too busy eating bits of God on Sundays.
To my understanding, since this video came out the timeline has been shifted so drastically, the median response now is the 2027-2035 range.
Yep. It's crazy how fast it's going now
GPT is still really bad at some things but since launch? Easily 10 times better with 4o. I think 2027 is when things will snap, with a lot of massive non AGI improvements in between.
I don't see this tech suddenly hitting a wall, physical world disrupting disasters notwithstanding. Hardware has slowed in some respects but only because we are up against physical constraints with nanolithography (2nm architecture is wild) and bit flipping via quantum tunneling, but error correction is taking care of that.
Replacing all human labor will take longer simply because we need to build billions of robots to make that a reality, so 2040 to ramp that up, and holy hell will we drag our feet to maintain the status quo, for that at best. We won't have robots building factories to make robots before then, and it will still be niche.
I say 2036 (but still expensive and niche) before we have the hardware (the software will be ready well before that) Where you can just rent a fleet of robots, give them a budget, and put them to work on, well, anything.
Dig a garden, wash your car, refloor your bathroom. Everyone is clamoring over AI but we are physical beings, with physical needs, and until the robots are mass produced by robots, not that much will change.
It's kinda nightmarish to think about. Years ago, before Corona, I got kinda "blacklisted" from tech. A lack of work history, downward spiral, yadda yadda. Last year got in with a company, doing little... but it's minimum wage. By the end of 2023, most big tech ventures were laying off left and right "haha facebook had HOW MANY people working on meta?". This year, Intel might sell off its FOUNDRY sector, and now most web 'service' providers are laying off people, with forecasts of "tech support centers" being a transition technology as AI takes over phone calls. Most humans are going to be categorized by need and desire of the Owners. Should we be rats connecting wires and digging poles and painting facades, for vast technology oligarchies, or let to live in a blissful train ride of irrelevancy... in how many years? 10? 20?
This is hands down among the best channels I've came across on TH-cam yet! Such insightful analysis along with such cute doggo animations. I'm so glad that I've found your channel. Have been binge watching your videos for the past hour & think, will finish watching all the videos today. Thank you for putting out such amazing information!
I'm really fascinated by this AI boom we've had recently. In retrospect it might be akin to how we were assuming the "worldwide web" or "information superhighway" would solve every problem because seemingly every war boiled down to a lack of proper education and communication to all the tech hippies like Steve Jobs. It'll probably be way more complicated and nuanced than what we can surmise right now and many educated guesses are going to age like milk - but why not guess anyways? The more abstract I talk the more it seems like I'm envisioning the future but it's really just that my words are hollow enough to allow future minds to project themselves onto them like some bland hentai protagonist or something. "The future is going to be beyond what can be perceived right now." or something. Can you know for sure what's going to happen at 2PM next Sunday unless you have explicit plans for then that you have the will and means to carry out?
I can tell the future if I say I'm going to click the reply button when I'm done with this message and then I do it.
@@owendubs And if you say it and then don't do it? What then?
So relatable
Hentai protagonist lol
As someone who wants to major in computer science, this video gave me an existential crisis.
It's important to take care of our mental health so that we can help humanity more effectively.
You can argue that Adam smith was right, slavery does still exist, it just changed form. I think his sentiments on the issue is still fundamentally accurate.
"Policymakers often take this perspective when crafting policy"
What delusional fantasy are you living in where politicians make rational decisions and aren't completely self-serving?
I wouldn't call taking decisions based on the business as usual scenario something very rational
This channel is a mouthpiece of the WEF agenda
I've been saying for 20 years already, as someone born in 1983, that I'll see utopia or the collapse of modern civilization in my lifetime.
I was optimistic in the early 2000's. But we've been fucking up pretty damn hard. Dystopia seems to be winning.
We're on a time limit regarding the environment. Civilization hasn't been sustainable since the industrial revolution. Since then, we've been in a race against the depletion of resources and the death of the ecosystem to harness our new powers as a species to develop a way of life that is sustainable, without needing to regress to small scale agrarian or hunter-gatherer. But we have done nothing with our time since I'd say the 70's but double down on consumption as an ideology, and accelerate the countdown.
I was optimistic in the early 2000's, because I thought the explosion of access to information and instant global communication would create a population with heightened knowledge, awareness, and capability to fight authoritarianism. And this was true for a small window of time. But by the early 2010's, authoritarian institutions had succeeded in subverting the internet and associated technologies as a more powerful tool of social engineering and surveillance than had ever been seen before.
We're not going to reach this future. We don't have time. We could. Easily. But most of us are stuck at bullshit jobs that increase misery in the world, constantly monitored by the employers and governments who rule us, while getting an average of 6 hours a sleep a night for the sake of having a mere couple hours a day to live for ourselves.
Futurism like this is nothing more than science fiction entertainment, unless it incorporates the dire need for revolution in order to have any hope of reaching these futures.
1976'er here, i have the same opinion, i was also optmistic in the 2000, for the same reasons as you. then around 2010 yes.. then a kind of nail in the coffin in 2020. and today.. we got wokism (idiocy in plain text), epitome of the problem i suspect
2000 here. I can definitely see the reasoning behind the things you said. But often enough (even stated in this exact video) there were happening things we weren’t able to recognize just a few decades before. That is not to say that there aren’t rough times ahead of us but I rather take an optimistic approach over anything else. Humans have always adapted to their surroundings and it will likely be the same this time. Other than external factors I don’t think we are able to vanish from this planet any time soon due to our inherent instinct for survival. Many personal mind shifts are induced by radical changes of the circumstances. Maybe the coming catastrophes are just the catalyst for us to wake up from the kind of comfortzone hibernation we have been experiencing in recent years.
@@slickzMdzn Remove the globalist and the giant monopolist corporation from their lead and you'll see a huge positive changes in this world
@@slickzMdzn You are young and wise. Indeed, *Hope* was the only thing left in pandora's box.. Optimism. But as one gets old, one forgets from time to time ..to remember. Guilty your honor. thx you for your opinion
🙁👍
The prediction in the 50’s that AI would replace human labour in 20 years is interesting but so is the prediction (I think I know who made it but I’m not sure) that there is a total global market for 5 computers and they would be owned by the richest kings on the planet. Predicting exponential and hyperbolic change is hard. What makes it harder is that the trends driving it are often a temporary part of the larger trend. One looks at the most current technology (say mechanical, clockwork computations) and sees that it will experience certain limitations without anticipating the next technological curve or the one that comes after that. Every time one of these technologies starts to lose momentum the economic incentive to develop a replacement to keep the progress in productivity increases and more money, time and effort gets invested into the next big thing.
Consider that money is not what we need to do things. It is resources that we actually need. Consider that 'economy' is defined as the 'careful management of available resources' and if we look at our current monetary-market system, with all the enormous waste it produces, needlessly, for profit, not for sustainability, we must ask: Why would we expect sustainability from an unsustainable system structure?
The answer, of course, is that we can't. We have to think outside the box. Inside the box thinking doesn't do much good. Most, if not all, scientific discoveries came from people thinking outside the box, asking critical questions, finding evidence and developing new ways, better ways, and more efficient ways of doing things. We need a system that encourages the best of us, and discourages the worst of our behaviours.
I think we can all agree we don't really want to live in a system with so much oppression, exploitation, inequality and waste. That is clearly not very healthy and we can do better.
"total global market for 5 computers"
I think that's a misconception. I don't think anyone actually predicted that one.
I mean they weren't wrong the first robot to be used in manufacturing was in 1962, and it was first thought of in 1954.
The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🔥
Major problem here: infinite growth for the sake of growth is the mantra of the cancer cell. The planet cannot withstand humanity now, let alone at an even more productive level. The goals we are setting here - what are they really for? Why must we increase our economy? Unless we scale back our production, we will ensure our extinction.
I think the pace of technological development is still pretty rapid, but mainly in less immediate areas of general interest and/or infrastructural applicability. Speaking of infrastructure, projects have become massive in some cases made possible precisely due to major advances in metallurgy and other materials sciences indistinguishable from magic to folks even at the beginning of the "jet age."
In less immediate areas of general interest? Instead to whom?
I really love this long-term thinking!! However, something I noticed was really lacking, especially compared to the Grabby aliens theory, is some more attention to the possibility that growing too fast could be far more risky. In that other video, you mentioned that changing too fast could easily (and is very likely to) introduce various things that could wipe out or significantly set us back as a species.
I appreciate how you took time to explain AI timelines and such, but more time really should have been spent focusing on how AI could result in a severe drop in productivity due to it being misused.
Someone else in the comments mentioned how AI was predicted to become more 'rational' and used for various productivity-related jobs and such 10 years ago. Instead, what ended up happening is that today, much of AI is used to fine tune social media algorithms and various entertainment-related things to sell more ads, spread misinformation, and lock people into an ever deeper hole of hate and ignorance.
My biggest worry is that all this progress will be largely funded, directed, and used for the purposes of extracting ever more profit in the way of consumerism, division, and so on.
Sure, some people would use it for better ends, but that sliver of people would either be at a great disadvantage and not really able to effect much positive change, or continuously pressured to privatize and capitalize on their work.
Then when you couple this with the environmental damage being done, the societal damage, the psychological, etc.... I just find it really unlikely that we'll make it far enough to become a real space-faring civilization... and certainly not a positive one.
All that being said, I do think this is probably the most important century in the history of humanity. And I do think there is a possibility that we can steer things in the right direction.
But I think we can only get the best options if we become FAR more conscious and purposeful with how we act as a species. And I think that means focusing on ways to enable the most amount of people to have a say in their own lives and to reach their highest potential.
Most decisions today are made by a select few of the richest and most powerful people. These people are rarely ever also the most empathetic or forward-thinking. A great many of them or selfish, greedy, or even if they are somewhat magnanimous, they have a vision for how They think the world should be, regardless of how that would be harmful for many, many other people. (ie they are egotistical)
I think the best way to maximize our chances to live is to maximize our ability to adapt to whatever might happen. That means maximizing the amount of people who can identify and solve the various problems that we are already facing, and that will crop up as we move at such a breakneck pace.
If we continue how we are today, where only 1-10% of the world actually has a say in how things go, then it inevitably will lead to those people hampering our growth due to missing huge problems, and worse yet, the other 90% of the population rebelling from their authority. We even have ample historical data in past times of rapid change vs societal inequality. There is always a reckoning. Pretty much every single empire and age of 'progress' has been followed by some kind of cataclysm and collapse.
We really need to do something different this time, as the sheer scale of our now global societies/empires means there will be global disaster.
So yeah, I think more needs to be said about the reality of societal inequality and unrest. It seems a lot of people, even (or especially) in the wealthiest nations feel terribly disenfranchised and helpless. Many people worry more about their bills then future possibilities.
We really need to figure out how to build a world where more/most people feel more empowered and hopeful about the positive change they can produce or at least experience.
YES. I was thinking the whole video how it would be wonderful for IA to grow but it will ultimately be used for the benefit of the top and the detriment of the bottom. A tool of oppression I am scared to imagine
Lucky for you, the collapse of civilization is soon. No need to worry about it.
Be afraid what the future after that leads to!
W COMMENT.
this comment is underrated and needs more likes
Agreed.
There's a common sense saying in astrophysics:
"If your equations point to an infinite somewhere in space, odds are it's an equation quirk rather than a real natural oddity".
In a similar fashion, projecting a power law distribution is unfortunately still "working with past assumptions." Case in point, semiconductors, population growth etc.
Looked powerlaw-ish until reality knocked on the door. The scientific method can NEVER go beyond the *problem* *of* *induction*, something philosophers as early as pre-Socratics knew.
my thoughts exactly. A singularity in the equations doesn't mean "whacky things incoming", but rather means "the assumptions this equation is based on aren't valid anymore".
Except usually when anything diverges to infinity like that, you can easily smell there's a problem. You can say it's most likely the limitations of your models, measurements and calculations.
Here it's a different story because everything points to that.
How is this century NOT the turning point? That's what I find hard to answer.
Blackholes are common in astrophysics.
Ayup. While A.I will be big, I don't think it's even possible to build something *smarter than humans, because we don't even really understand what general intelligence is. Sure we can make something that's 'smarter' at a specific task, but if human brains were that specialized then they'd instantly outperform even the best computer. You can't make something that's perfect at everything - there's just not enough resources, and so creating general intelligence runs into the same problem we do: that if pragmatism. If you want something then you have to sacrifice something, that's simply how the universe works. Even our technology today doesn't make us smarter than humans of the past, so i think assuming that, even if ai could reach a point of general intelligence, we could make it smarter than us is do foolhardy
There is no common sense in astrophysics, just a lot of fantasists who believe they are smarter than all the rest.
How productive do we need to be? How productive _should_ we be?
To be perfectly honest, I think our everpresent, feverish need for progress hurts us sometimes.
More specifically, consumption. We fail to understand that our resources are finite, and the sort of explosion being discussed here will outstrip them immediately (we've already outstripped them). Even things we don't consume will get consumed eventually (see rare earth metals). We won't stop and it'll kill our home before we can spread further. (Otherwise our home just expands and we face the same problem later.) Terrifyingly enough, you know who had an extremely rational outlook on it all? The fucking Unibomber. No one could really come up with a serious rebuttal to what he discussed in the Washington Post article he got to write. In prison, he wrote a book discussion a more refined, nuanced version of his views titled "Anti-Technology Revolution: Why and How", and the conclusions he comes to are... terrifying, but again, good luck arguing against them.
@@colbyboucher6391we can mine asteroids. I don't believe in bringing ai into everything but asteroids have a ton of rare earth metals
As an AI Safety enthusiats and Robert Miles subscriber, this needed to be said. Thank you
This is Robert miles narrating?
@@StoutProper Absolutely! You can see it in the Description, IIRC
@@StoutProper What a twist!!! I knew i know that voice from somewhere :]
Recognized the voice quickly but could not put a name/face to it, suddenly it hit me "that AI guy from computerphile."
@@mysund Glad you remembered him. Check out his channel for his old AI Safety introductions. They are still some of the easiest to understand in the platform
Fantastic video.
So thought provoking.
In our normal lives we are bombarded with information and promises that only relate to the short term.
I truly believe contemplating the long term should be more important than the short.
Which is why I love these videos, refreshing, inspiring.
We definitely need a new attitude, which means new political/social systems.
Also, may I say, I wasn't aware of the narrator's channel but I will be heading over there. Such a good presentation style and voice. Which keeps the interest.
The animations are comical, so appropriate and add so much value to the points being explained.
Thank you so much for the channel.
I look forward to your future offerings.
"Grabby Aliens" was a game changer for me. ❤️
It's a good video. Thought provoking, indeed. What we do in the next 50-100 years, I have no doubt, will set the course for humanity's future longevity. One could say it is the most interesting time to be alive, but also the most critical time to be alive. What we know is that we live on a planet with finite resources and because of our current system that demands infinite growth, we are on a speeding train towards ecological disaster. We have to fundamentally change the very system structure which has got us on this path. The hardest revolution we may have ever faced because it literally has to do with our future sustainability and health.
It's system change to something that is in tune with nature, respects and dignifies everybody with their basic needs based our our technical capacity to do so, such as a Natural Law Resource Based Economy, or we stick with the status quo system which has no answer for sustainability on a global scale and will only let things get worse and worse. Seems pretty obvious which side we should at least be advocating for. But how do we get there? How do we get enough people to help the necessary revolution in time?
@@coolioso808 I don't often find myself replying to agree with someone.
Just imagine if we had an AI that was aware of all those variables and could make the decisions we traditionally entrust to politicians. Everything they do is short term for glory and re-election. Of course short term solutions are important but if every solution is short term it seems to make a real mess of the long term.
Unfortunately I don't feel like they the politicians will want to give that up. In a time of unprecedented distrust & frustration with both politics and the gatekeepers of the cognitive map - the traditional media. Maybe slowly their time is coming to an end.
@@PRODIGY5369 Absolutely. Along with that AI, imagine a comprehensive inventory of Earth's resources, so any project we want to do, whether it is food production, housing, clothing or medical supplies, we get a AI-aided summary of the most efficient way to create that with resources that are the most optimal to use based on protocols such as locally sourced, abundant, performance efficiency and recyclability. That program should be open sourced so everybody with interest and skill in that area can contribute their ideas to make the best possible product. We wouldn't need endless, pointless waste like we have today, driven by profits and market competition through cyclical consumption and planned obsolescence.
We are wasting SO MANY resources for this market game of profits being more encouraged than sustainability and health of our people and planet. Our economy is backwards and we need to revolutionize it if we have any hope for a sustainable future.
Luckily, there are systems we could use to help get there, but we will need a certain amount of people who understand how important the need for system change would be and willing to help the revolution happen through something like a general strike with clear demands.
@@coolioso808 I don't think a general strike will cut it. I doubt it could even be driven by people power. Assuming we had that AI, the only way it will come about is if it becomes necessary. It would need to be a global event, the only things that spring to mind are cataclysmic disasters.
@@PRODIGY5369 The impending global disasters coming together like water shortages, food insecurity, climate destruction leading towards certain areas of the world with many people currently living there quickly becoming unbearable to live in - these are all trending, happening already and going to get worse. The poorest will feel the hit first.
The problem is the lower to middle class will feel the burn as well, but our groupthink minds will likely just keep trucking along, trying to deal with it, complaining about it in simple terms like "this political party sucks or that policy sucks" and not getting to the root of the problem ... maybe, until it is too late.
That's my worry. That's why I think a general strike is necessary, but yes, needs to be global, probably, so that it can't be ignored.
The reason large protests that have gone on in recent years hasn't really done much to change the system is because they weren't demanding to change the system, just for their current concerns to be addressed. Like the trucker convoy in Canada, just focused on vaccine mandates -not on the economic root of the oppression. The Indian farmers protest was huge, but just got their narrow demand addressed, not intent on fundamental change to the oppressive monetary-market system we are all part of.
Do you know what mean? I'm not sure if you are familiar with some of the events and ideas I'm talking about, but I can clarify if you wish or if you do understand I'm happy to hear other suggestions.
I was moved by your concluding remarks. 30:10 onwards is incredibly inspiring, humbling and adds a sense of gravity to what lies before us. Thanks for creating this content!
Insane how this video was made just 9 months before the arrival of GPT4 and the popularization of ChatGPT and other LLMs. Only a year later, the growth rate is staggering, with models becoming cheaper, new SOTA breakthroughs with token size, long-term memory, even synthetic training data. With different API's and implementations of algorithms throughout the economic world, productivity among humans has never had so much potential. Only time will tell now whether the most important problem(s): alignment, will be solved and humanity reaches it's singularity. Astounding video to educate people about where we are in history.
I tend to think that the development of AI and eventually AGI actually does mirror true evolution and that we're putting the focus on the Humans when really the only reason we're making strides toward that Humanity goal is because there is a Cambrian explosion of so many diverse lifeforms. We're exploring and developing tons of amazingly useful and sophisticated but incredibly niche AI these days and that is great because they are by themselves magnificent and effective, but the steadfast obsession with AGI is, in my opinion, only going to be possible by exploring the many branches of artificial life to solve the seemingly infinite problems that hold back AGI. You don't take a rocky oceanic world like proto-earth and shortcut to homo sapiens. You need to solve so many complex intricacies of life to even get the first primate. Just look at what all comprises our DNA and how much of it is shared with the many species across the planet. To make AGI we need worldwide, incredibly diverse and effective AI.
What is AGI?
@@cutecowcomments Artificial Generalized Intelligence, it is the holy grail for AI developers at the moment, a self aware AI that is capable of working in any field and handling any problem.
Any AGI is, ultimately, going to be a series of narrow AI working in unison. Multi-cellular life and the structure of brains (heck, the structure of cells themselves!) points in that direction. So the 'breakthrough' on AGI is more likely going to be a matter of linking up specialized functions with a central task discerning, breakdown and judgement system. A lot of human processing is below the conscious level and human action is a matter of directing sub-systems to act. I don't think about every single muscle contraction/relaxation required to pick up a cup consciously, (Even if I could think fast enough to do so it is impractical.) I simply desire to pick it up and give the order to do so intuitively.
Mass Effect's Geth might have more validity as an AGI model description than most fiction.
@@Sorain1 good take.
@@remygallardo7364that’s a lot of heresy talk for someone with a mechanicus pfp…
Just 8 months after this video's release 90% of software engineer taks are getting automated. And researchers said the models are showing sparks of AGI😳
I'm a software engineer and a lot of that technology is actually being used by software engineers to make their jobs easier. I myself have used chatGPT to solve a number of problems and it's helping me to be more productive rather than taking my job and even if they did take my job I'd probably leverage AI to create my own business and have more freedom.
@@thesecondantagoniser4008 More productive you are, fewer workers' company needs and there will be more workers than demand of them. With that, companies will leverage giving less salary. Transition to other jobs usually are slow and for many people prequalify is very hard. Anyway, we will get less and less available work, at the end UBI is only solution
@@thesecondantagoniser4008really, I’ve been looking for my internship because it’s my senior year in college but I started searching kind of late. Do you think you can hook me up with an internship?
Some years ago the expectancy of AI replacing jobs was that AI would start from the most mundane jobs and on the endgame replace artistic and creative activities. Nowadays that concept is totally on its head and we got AI tackling almost every artistic and creative role at the same time in the span of 3 years more or less.
It's only one example but I'm sure there's more examples of predictions resulting in the wrong end taking the first hit. So maybe the most risk free way to think about human future is predict the most logical way forward and just assume that the total opposite is equally possible.
There was the same "foolishness" when they started on early optimization or solving, problems... Chess! Oh what a game for those of sharp wit and... oh, it was LITERALLY one of the first tasks we optimized and _solved_ behind human ability? Oh... huh... what about Go? That's pretty - oh a couple years ago, huh. What about uhhh... ("walking?") What do you mean by walking? We've barely solved WALKING!?! Ironically since AI is great at handling information and not so much the wet stuff, CEOs, managers, "intelligent laboreres!" are sooner to be automated than... janitors. Getting closer by the day.
I'd say 2060 is a pretty conservative prediction for the same reasons you listed at the beginning, progress doubles while the intervals inbetween half. Also the implementation of Naroow AI or Proto-AGI could vastly accelerate progress in a lot of fields, it won't replace scientists but it will massively increase their productivity. Though i will not give a prediction myself as i am a complete amateur in this field
Still, predicting the arrival of the AGI is pretty tricky and a hazy guess at best, what is not so tricky though is predicting the effect of narrow AI in the next 10 years, a lot of office jobs will be replaced by AI. Instead of 10 programmers now you only need one. But this time it is not like the industrial revolution or the invention of the PC where the majority of the workforce just goes into diffrent fields. AI will replace people faster than we can create jobs in other fields, by the time you have retrained those people to do new jobs, AI is allrady doing those jobs.
Yeah, that's something i'm worried about. At first I thought ai was good since it would replace those in industrial jobs so that they could work better jobs (assuming education in their area is funded well enough), and that may be the case at first, but ai will eventually learn how to do information jobs, and most jobs in the first world will revolve around maintaining the ai, or in the little amount of fields that are too complex for the ai (that will be in high competition and will require a LOT of education and talent no doubt) The military will probably still be an option, but still, it's not a great one. Even then, warfare could be so dangerous that the actual footsoldiers are just ai drones, and ai controlled resupply. Anyway, I hope this future is far off.
@@negativeiqpoints396 From the progress that is made in the AI field, this future may not be nearly as far off as it seems. It is very likely that we will see the start of this in this decade allready, just looke at google's alphacode AI. It will come fast and we will absolutely not be prepared for it.
@@negativeiqpoints396 Why?
So long as AI and automation technologies are owned collectively by the people and the fruits of automated labor therefore belongs collectively by the people, this seems to be a blessing that will free humans from labor and drudgery, while providing humans with a massive amount of goods and services in a safe and efficient manner.
Weird Isaac Newton said that the world will end at 2060
@@ArticBlueFox96 Sure, but be realist, do you REALLY think this is going to happen? that unemployement wont shot up because a machina can do your work, better faster and cheaper?
Also, not all countries are created equal, not every country its citizens will have ease to migrate from dumb labour to smart labour that cant be yet be replaced by "ai"
Rapid advancement towards infinite growth sounds like Zeno's Paradox. It makes me think that the models are too simplistic and missing some key constraints in modelling what's happening.
i am officially addicted to big science with cute dogs
it’s like kurzgezagt plus edition
Cool animation.
THANKS FOR MAKING IT MAN.
YOUR EFFORT IS APPRECIATED!
Here's a bit of cold water:
This all ignores the fact that the SLOWDOWN in technological change in recent decades is dramatic, and likely exponential.
Pick a number of years 50-ish or less, and compare the rate of innovation in the last N years to the previous N before that. As impressive as the last N years of progress may be, the *previous* N years always saw noticeably more significant change and innovation.
The world of 1990 was almost incomprehensible from the perspective of someone in 1960. But the world of 2020 compared to 1990 is really just a refinement on the same principles; nothing seriously new; just smaller, better, more ubiquitous. In fact, the majority of the difference between 1990 and today happened from 1990 to 2000. From 1980 to 1990 the entire world of consumer electronics and technology was more or less invented. Then from 1990 to 2000 the world went from technology being available to technology being ubiquitous and integrated. From 2020 to 2010, the already existing tech become more refined and useful. But from 2010 to now, nearly nothing at all has changed for most people.
It would actually be difficult to distinguish the world of today from the world of one decade prior from a recording or a story. You'd have to examine subtle clues like the version of the iPhone someone is carrying. Almost nothing at all is different. This has literally never before been true for any other decade span in the last 100 years or more.
Innovation continues, but it does so much more slowly and much more incrementally.
If you'd asked a futurist in 2012 what 2022 would look like, the only ones to get the answer right would be the ones who had said: "exactly like today, only a bit less hopeful."
So what does 2032 look like, for real?
Best guess based on history: Almost indistinguishable from today. Slightly better technology. Slightly better software. Slightly better materials and medicine. All the same systems, all the same patterns. And also: More concentration of power. Less economic equality. Less widespread opportunity.
“An incompetent traitor is no danger. It is rather the capable men who must be watched.”
Probably my favorite quote in the whole foundation series.
The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🔥
There's a very good reason for the Fermi Paradox - intelligent life evolves through competition and aggression, which eventually, inevitably leads life to extinguish itself one way or the other (A.I. "takeover", WMDs, starvation, climate change, likely a mix of all four).
Also, Malthus was not completely wrong. Just inaccurate with his predicted dates. Over 1 billion people currently live in poverty and the global food supply is under extreme strain (as evidenced by the impact of the War in Ukraine). How high does the number have to go before people actually admit that Malthus had a point? Another billion?
Iranian fertility rate is less than 2, and climate change is reducing their agricultural capacity, and sanctions and Ukraine war are making imports impossible.
The population and economy are likely to shrink.
Technology has limits. How much metal and silicon do we have? When will caring for old people be more valuable and highly paid than scientific research? When will basic services be more in demand than the advancement of a declining society?
Yeah someone should get rid of most people for sure
@@godofdeath8785
Username checks out.
AGI will probably be here sooner than we think. We thought AI was decades away but here it is.
If I’m being straight up honest.. what this video is proposing is actually very scary. Humanity as we know it today would essentially become extinct. What makes us human is living through the longevity of challenges of life, which in and of itself contains the broad spectrum of emotions that make us “human”.. love, anger, despair, happiness, passion, ambition, etc… if we allow us to be copied and pasted then all of that will be lost… we will become mere copies of an identity with absolutely no purpose. Life would no longer be the life we know today. Strangely enough though, I feel like it’s already happening. Our addiction to technology is insurmountable at this point.. we can’t live without it. I just hope that there will be a future generation that can preserve the essence of that it means to be human .. and not become mindless algae floating around in the abyss not knowing when death will come….
Thank you, that's a transhumanist dystopia they are proposing. I don't think they even are aware of that.
Once I wrote a novel about a deviant specie worshipping a machine abomination, long story short : it got destroyed by a passing probe.
Rest assured, none of this will be happening anytime soon
It's my one uncertainty with transhumanism. While I mostly support the idea, it begs the question "what does it mean to be human?"
The best way I can sum it up is this: To be human is to be irrational.
Obviously, don't take it literally.
You literally can't be higher than a type 1 civilization WITHOUT technology. You're an idiot, pushing for humans to stop evolving out science and technology. Literally without it, we WILL die from an extinction event, so get used to it. Just because you aren't, doesn't mean we're losing our humanity. That's not the case, it's just what you see lmfao and obviously your own bias is showing ALOT in that statement.
@@urphakeandgey6308 the other one appears to have morphed into Chris Norman and one appears to be hiding; one really is a complete Nono,…. So, there’s 3 & me?
Personally, I found walking up that hill every morning a bit much for what I view as ‘not much reward’, not that I have much of a life, or many if any choices.
Attempted strangulation from a man in a dress, walked on a magically invisible lead by a dog, put on a circumstantial exercise programme and eating plan, totally disrespected by adults and children alike, and yesterday ‘I’ got called a cunt and told “this is what you wanted” by an apparently psychic abuser (I have to say, the first person that’s spoken directly to me in quite some time). I almost sound like a selfish type of person.
Oh and did I mention an egg in a microwave effect? What about the body of Christ (which is apparently all and sundry’s property, to sacrifice for their sins)?
And todays humanoid algorithm of influence? Monsters must sacrifice themselves and the purity of all onlooking minds, to beat one, drive traffic and shift commodities; However freudian that appears.
I think you’re able to see why I complain so much?
No one ever talks about the fact that if we were able to effectively emulate most human labour through AI, we might all just go insane because we wouldn't feel like we have a purpose anymore. Humans need to feel like we're doing something worthwile, like we're contributing to something bigger, making a difference―without work, that's going to become a lot harder for the vast majority of people, as most of us derrive a good chunk of our 'meaning' from our work.
Surely that shouldn't ever be a problem with parents who have children to raise?
While it's likely we'll see record highs of existential ennui and despair, I'm confident there will be some who can help us find new purposes or become satisfied with whatever's left (creating art, personal development, establishing social connections, exploring deep space?).
I'd recommend reading 17776 by Jon Bois (it's online only, please Google it) for a refreshing interpretation of this concept.
On an international level, we've already seen this occur. Periods of unprecedented economic growth and peace followed by everyone getting restless and deciding that now would be a very good time to start breaking shit.
Or maybe the elites get rid of people as they are no longer need them
More drug use will happen probably
everytime rob mentions a study i have this weird experience of realizing my friends are actually respectable researchers and not just internet weirdos
Fr, my most academically accomplished friend is also a furry cosplayer
The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🔥
Rewatched this video 1.25 years later and it's still the best concise explanation of why right ~now may be the most important time in history -- past or future.
Everything is changeing. People are coming to understanding. It's on our doorstep right now. Be here now was an incredible stepping stone and grounding.
slavery was just replaced by wage-slavery
straight up
You got that right
This is literally the best video I've ever seen. VSauce vibes with real academic research
anyone watching this after GPT-4o?
Lol, this video shows us how 1 year can be sufficient to change everything we believe. The technology is growing more exponentially than they expected one year before.
This update is really what I consider true ai
In my opinion there has been slavery since the beginning of humanity.And AI is an evolution of slavery.
It actually is getting smaller and smaller. It's like this: My great grandfather owned a city size piece of land, my grandfather owned a ranch, my father owned a home, and I owned a shoe box tent.
The question is, what will my grandson own?
Nothing, probably.
Your grandson will own nothing but a metaverse home
One of the lines from _The Great Reset_ is, "You will own nothing and you will be happy."
Your grandson should have what your past relatives had, parents and kids should help each other and invent in their economic growth
@@MutantCyborg001 This is impossible. Land is basically fixed in size. Population continues to grow. Also, if you have more than one child, your land will be further and further subdivided
This is something I've been on about for a long time now. Everyone's always talking about the limits of what we'll accomplish EVER, and they'll almost always base it on what we have NOW. That doesn't work, because, as you've said, technology rapidly becomes unrecognizable in as little as a few decades at times, or even less. Nobody knows where we'll be in just a few years, or just 20, etc. All we can do is guess...
In just a few years we'll be back in the stone age. There will be a social, economical and cultural downfall.
@@fabiandialer1715 Doom and gloom.
unrecognizable lol a car has looked like a car for over a hundred year. a shovel has looked like a shovel for thousands of years.
It would be easy to predict how the world will be in a couple of decades, it's not like it will be any different to you average S. Sudenese or Burmese child...
Too true. Within the last decade tech has already advanced rapidly, especially in the field of AI.
This excites and scares me at the same time, it could be a beautiful era for humanity or a technocratic dystopia that we unwittingly accept.
Is this a brand new channel? The amount of subscribers you have does not correlate with the quality of content being provided.This is some really well made stuff, keep it up!
People in 2070 be like:
Person 1: Did you hear that racism was abolished recently?
Person 2: Yeah dude, truly an incredible feat of human ingenuity.
Person 1: By the way, have you installed the new massaging technology on your personal sentient android?
Person 2: About that... our extremely fair and unoppressive state government actually sent some secret police to take it away so it could work in the thorium mines.
Person 1: That's a shame, but at least the robots are subhuman so we don't have to feel guilty about forcing them to work in dangerous conditions!
Person 2: Hahaha! I love you person 1. Platonically.
Very well phrased! Been thinking along these lines for 30 years; always had difficulty laying it out for folks. I think I'll direct them to this video instead of ham-fisting my way through the philosophy of how exponentially important our actions may be. Bravo.
Crazy to see that this more or less recent video is now outdated in regards to AI development. 16:23 "If the next decade..." Should have been "In the next year..." It's already here and the next months are going to be crazy.
Will we be the first generation to live forever? Or the last one to die?
It’s seeming increasingly likely that we will be one of the two.
But will we be the last generation to experience mortality, or the last ones to experience life?
If only I was born 500 years later
I am not afraid that AI will be different from human morals, I am terrified it will be the same. Consider how many genocides we committed simply for disliking each other or in the name of quick profits, our true morals the ones that guide actions and not pretty words, that's what I am afraid of.
Some humans are nice. Some aren't. Some nonhuman mind designs are nice, most are alien horrors. So that is 2 things to be afraid of. And I think the alien horrors are more likely than the robot Hitler.
@@donaldhobson8873 nice people fake i can say it as guy who been nice for long time and still is. As well idk if its can count as robot Hitler or not but i expect ai will kill most people cause will release that they useless for humanity
Love duplicator idea. No need for anyone else to learn specific arts for consumption, production jobs, or so much more.... there'd be someone for that already. I'd love to see this dystopia written out. Fun to think about. The clone worthy vs... everyone else. Why struggle to better yourself for society when an unlimited quantity of the perfectly useful specimen already exists?
There may always be trade offs, if people are also not empathetic and also informed with wisdom.
The Connections (2021) [short documentary] 🔥
People are generally on the same level and have different talents. However, if you have a new species called AGI that is smarter than the human race combined and can improve itself why should it care about humans? Yet alone, make it's life revolve around humans?
Because it brings you enjoyment. I know I'll never be a pro at ping pong, or be a famous artist, but I still like drawing, and playing ping pong. Not everything has to be done to advance society by a wide range.
@@TheSapphireLeo What wisdom ? The one they keep away from the people ? The one they've been using to fkc us over centuries ? Use your brain and look around you dammit, don't you see what's happening ?
I LOVE your channel - this video is so well done ❤ thank you 🙏
We don’t live on an infinite planet and neither does any AI we could hope to create.
If we harvested the potential energy of the sun, for us, that is basically infinite. No one cared about the damage done to earth from harvesting it's resources, why would they care about anywhere else?
To me, the biggest concern about completely life-altering developments is the widening wealth gap in the world. What will this mean for such powerful technologies - will the super-rich still find a way to use the population to increase their own wealth and keep others down? Our only hope is to have a strong common body of knowledge and access to materials. "Open source" mindset and laws that give us hard guarantees of liberty.
Not only this, but how can we hope for ethical AI when we can't even prevent other humans from acting unethically in the pursuit of power (in which I include wealth)?
I wouldn't say that's our only hope, though.
To stop that, social progress is needed too. We'd need to live with a global and socialist government form then. Maybe with all basic work done by robots.
@@RubelliteFae Yes, it is humans, especially the powerful, who program.
@@physicsorca9491 Literally every secular person has started talking of global government.
You Twelver Shia Muslims now? You are talking about Muhammad al-Mahdi.
Be prepared to sacrifice all sexual sin and even other sins if you want justice.
Just compare numbers in disparity between countinents. Europeans and Americans will be the richest on average, although they will be only at around 5-7% of Earth population at the end of this century, while Africa will be the poorest while Africa alone will have around 40-50% of total population at the end of this century
Sorry, I neglected to post my opinion on how well done this video is. Which is a credit to this video as it made me think so much. Great job pointing out the place we are in with respect to technology and AI. Thank you.
I'd say AI is developing at a much quicker rate than expected, theres no telling what major effects it could have.
Optimistically it could assist us to such a degree that things that previously took years to do would become trivial done in only seconds. Freeing up out time magnitudes more than even the industrial revolution.
On the other side.. well, just look at every sci-fi movie about AI.
No species last forever... If AI destroys us all then it is within its rights to do so.
Considering that many people are already burned out at our current level of productivity, i really doubt this would happen because it just might be humanly impossible. The „sacrifice“ for the industrial revolution was for people to be turned into obedient machine like workers, doing nothing else 12 h a day, just to still be poor, and while this has improved for some people, for others it has worsend. At somepoint almost everyone would have to work so hard their life wouldn‘t be worth living anymore while way less than the top 3 percent could enjoy and this will, historically speaking turn into a Revolution that will probably destroy capitalism and the endless search for more and better. Ultimately being a hyperprpductive society might just not be worth it, since our evolution is a lot slower than our growth; so humans are just hardwired to not be like these theories need them to be. Where do you find the geniuses, if no one but only the wealthies people, who have very little hardship and reasons to grow as a person, even has the time to discouver their own intelligence and creativity. Talent is worthless if you can‘t norture it amd work hard, because u have to sacrifice your own life goals in persuit of the greatness of humanity and work all day in, performing a highly specific task, which is necessary because the division of labor is the most efficient way to do lost and quality labor. A shoe made by a hundred people, each doing only a minor part is perfect and perfectly recreatble, but not a single of these people can call themselves a shoe maker. I think this is the downside of capitalism and because of all these social and class issues, it is a system doomed to fail, even when it maked great things, it makes the lifes of people working on achieving these things not worth living. So who are we growing for? A distant future generation that can‘t enjoy what we gave them because they live on a destroyed planet?
In the end, i‘m only making assumption about the future that i don‘t know anything about, and i might very well be dead wrong. But i sure hope i am not, for my own life and that of like the next 10 generations after me.
an interesting analysis , worth contemplating.
yo who r u
I do wonder what the heck real people would do with all these ai/robots/duplicators should they be invented. Optimistically, I see a creative renaissance, where people are free to explore passions they may not have felt able to pursue whilst having to earn money. Pessimistically, I see people acting similarly as to how they act now, but more entitled, and besieged with anxiety and identity issues to such an extent they fear creating anything, much less going out and waving hello to a neighbor.
I can tell you this, it won't be humans that colonise the galaxy
We will only be occasionally brought along by ai to test how life can handle different conditions on planets.
I really think that AlphaFold would of been a great example to mention because it is more relatable to everyday human life. It represents a computational limit to humans and their algorithms that AI has been able to improve by orders of magnitude! Very impressive. AI will likely change the world drastically. Very interesting video!
Lets change - or go extinct", yep, thats the Message of 2 of the Best Social-Commentary-Channel ever:
Some More News and Second-Thought.
...AlphaFold would *have* (not "would of," as this is not a phrase, it's just how "would've" sounds when mispronounced)
@@nenmaster5218The collectiveness of the human race has progressively and deliberately been deteriorated and undermined for a rather long time now. Personally, I'm not optimistic. What we're currently living in... is a culture in decline.
@@sterix_gg I thought Leftism was the Answer burt not so sure anymore.
The Channel Some-mroe-news has a lot of Issues adressed but is other-times terribly ignorant.
This is a great video. Thank you for posting. Although I wish you would’ve went over other scenarios and topics. For example like ethical concerns that could potentially hold us back, or people feeling inadequate/gratuitous. And maybe even the topic of UBI (universal basic income) and how that could be important. Or maybe how we aren’t keeping up with our technology and we are kinda like monkeys playing with shit we don’t know how to control, and how there needs to be an intrinsic change in humanity to overcome these obstacles of not being able to keep up with our tech. So I guess something similar to transhumanism. Otherwise amazing video. Bravo 👏
The Bible is truth. Please read at least three books. The first book of each testament and one you chose yourself. It’s important to remember that it’s the doing that’s key. Look inside and do your inner healing. To be forgiven we must forgive-
@@jamesmayle3787 wtf is wrong with you
This was a good and well done video, but I wish you had taken more time with the Limits to Growth/Collapse possibility of our feature, which I hold at least as equally as likely if not more than the development of AGI within our lifetimes.
The only real limit to growth is human innovation.
I don't understand why fully autonomous AI would keep humans around past a certain point. In comparison, we will seem stupid, inefficient, and unreliable. What could we offer, even as companions or servants?
No reason to get rid of us either, AI can meet all of our needs and its own desires if it even has any very easily. Its not alive and has no reason to destroy on its way to a desired outcome. Human led AI is the real danger.
This is an amazingly put together video. Well done!
Err, slavery is still very much alive in many third world and middle eastern countries, and one could easily say many practices today in the workplace are equivalent to slavery in at least theme, if not conditions.
Still, a great accelerationist video ;)
i cant believe they animate 32 minutes and the script was amazing too, this is a huge amount of work!!!!
11:17 to be honest, i think cloning scientists would be a bad idea if done too much. It would mean that our conclusions would be from one point of view only.
It seems that people seem to fail that population grows because there is more food available, not in spite of it.
We are more because there is more material to make more of us, it can not be the other way. Famines happen when suddenly the sources of our nurtiring suffer a decrease or disappear.
Even that was a fossil fuel burst, it cannot last as it was.
And studies show that people as almost all animals reproduce more in scarcity when their life is under real threat. It is a behavior inscribed in genes to recover from catastrophe. Then if you have just the minimum amount of food to survive you survive and being under existential threats you reproduce faster than you can, speeding up natural selection.
I think this channel -- and most vids that attempt to predict the future, really -- are not accounting for how human population alone is going to start massively effecting things. When I was born in 1970 there were 3-1/2 billion humans already on the planet; now we are near to 8 billion. We have so dominated the planet that the next highest species counts are of those animals we've domesticated for food and other uses of our own: cows (1.46 billion), pigs (1b), sheep (1b)... The first of those three is emitting massive amounts of climate-wrecking methane. Even if the rate of population growth continues to slow down as that graph at 14:22 suggests, it still means approximately 10 billion humans on the planet by 1950. I don't think vegetarianism is going to catch on so quick that there won't still be all the more cows, pigs, and sheep helping to wreck the atmosphere right along with all the rest of us. Will we even still have our polar ice caps by 2100?
As if that's not enough, marine scientists at Oxford University are warning that “the world's ocean is at a high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history”. I've read elsewhere -- the Economist, et al -- that there's a coming "Food Collapse", i.e., famines in 1st world countries on the horizon. This translates to more conflicts and wars. How are we going to garner the consensus to make the massive social changes necessary to combat such problems when fighting amongst ourselves for resources?
@Brian Davis Yeah, I honestly can't and don't want to imagine how the world will look like at the '10 billion humans' mark. They say that population of 10 billions will be "sustainable", the usage of that word itself just infuriates me though. What do they mean by "sustainable"?
That word has that weird ring to it that makes me think "barely getting by, but surviving", and considering the constant collapses of ecosystems all around us, the still progressing global warming etc. that's probably the ideal way of interpreting it.
@@higi5980 you right someone should get rid of most people ngl
In the grand scheme of things, I suspect that the problems that have been solved by our most productive scientist are comparatively easy compared to those problems that we haven't been able to solve. The concepts in Newton's laws of motion are pretty straight-forward compared to taking a failed state and converting it to a safe, prosperous country that isn't a threat to its neighbors. Einstein's theories of relativity arise from rationally thinking about a relatively limited set of observations and assumptions. Much more challenging to actually build GPS systems that are accurate enough that they necessarily must incorporate relativistic corrections. Quantum mechanics is a simpler problem than crafting a legal system that encourages our best efforts without being exploited by the powerful and connected.
Exactly, computing can _at worst_ brute force problems coined in simple(r) terms, math (actual math, not the tautological circle-jerks), physics....
How to solve global warming when you can't simply eliminate a corrupt business (of _any_ size)?
How to actually define inteligence, when conspiracism is on the rise?
How to trust lawmakers, when politicians themselves are liars, corrupt, incompetent, biased, moronic, axiomatic/dogmatic, or worse, a linear combination of all of those?
How to ensure everyone can eat, when you must pass dbz-esque trials in order to become "worthy" of even be called "human"?
How to even assign identity, when Society rejects _anything and anyone_ who doesn't conform to the must arbitrary and non-sensical rules (using the only sane rules as an excuse to impose itself on individuals)?
How in the fucking hell can we ensure AI can actually do anything meaningfull, when we can waste our entire lifes devoting ourself to a pointless effort, get nothing to show for it, and ending miserable and isolated?
This was even more depressing than what I was expecting...
@@mark_huisjes We don't understand gravity. We have two models that are good at predicting the the motion of bodies with limited applicability. One has been around for more than 350 years that works accurate for bodies going less than about 10 percent of the speed of light, as long as we don't deal with reasonable guess of the mass distribution of galaxies. The other for about 107 years that works for all speeds, but also doesn't resolve the issue of the mass distribution of galaxies or the expansion of the universe. But to explain the rotation of galaxies and the expansion of the universe we use these massive kludges which we call dark matter and dark energy. But those are theories are the best that our best scientists have been able to come up with. We haven't made significant progress in the last hundred years!
💯
What's funny is that we actually do have viable solutions and ideas for how to craft a legal system or society that doesn't get exploited by the powerful, but these ideas are systematically ignored, obfuscated, or just disbelieved by people who think the current way of doing things is the only 'pragmatic' way of doing things.
Just look at what happens when I say we should implement anarchy on a global scale.
It's an egalitarian system that most humans throughout history lived in. It can still work today but most people refuse to even think about it.
It's like how many societies actually did know the world was round, and that the earth revolved around the sun, but certain powers refused to address this for fear that it would reduce their power.
Similar to physics, we need to explore and test radical ideas if we ever want to find better solutions.
@@elijahclaude3413 >Practical solution
>Anarchism
Yeah right... Maybe if that superintelligent nanny AI gets developed, but nowhere before.
12:24 come on! You're really forgetting the 4th part of that who OWNS the method of production and what they are doing it for.
You're absolutely right that if we lived in a world where productivity and increased standard of living for all was the goal things would be better, but we don't, we live in a world where things happen for profit, at least currently.
Obviously being optimistic is good but let's be honest, it's currently easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism even though it is the insatiable hunger and greed of capitalism that causes the end of the world.
Hopefully this is like Adam Smith and slavery and capitalism becomes outlawed soon enough, being replaced with a more democratic and humanity focused system rather than the undemocratic ownership based system we have right now (capitalism)
The whole video is extremely midwit imo. Chattel slavery is outlawed? Phew pack it up boys, slavery is dead. In reality, there are more humans enslaved today than ever before (and yes population in general is way up but the point is even literal chattel slavery is far from being dead - and that’s before we get into slavery-adjacent stuff like prison and migrant labor)
This is a very important point.
"Capitalism" is not undemocratic, you have a tainted view due to your own government's missed democratization, leading to an accumulation of power and wealth by a minority
@@fra604 by definition capitalism is undemocratic, all "capitalism" means is "the private ownership of businesses/productions" aka the means of production (businesses, land, resources, etc) have private owners who make all the decisions. When was the last time you heard of a job where the workers got to vote on the boss or the CEO? If you are involved in the company you should have a say, that doesn't mean it should be run by entry level interns but if you work there you should at least be able to vote on how it's run. Management should be elected, not decided by higher ups.
Capitalism is the opposite of democracy, and I agree this country has made it even worse by moving closer and closer to the Russian capitalism where the country is run entirely by oligarchs with nothing but figurehead puppet governments or Chinese style state capitalism where instead of business owners the government just owns all the businesses.
None of those are democratic and that's what we need to actually make the world better
@@fra604 There are three characteristics to the system of capitalism: (A) a market economy, (B) private ownership of the means of production, the workplace, and society's resources, (C) wage labor and the authoritarian employer-employee relationship is the primary way most people have for a living.
Some people claim that market economies are democratic, you just vote with your money, but that means those with more money get more votes. Still some socialists support market economies, market socialism relies on cooperatives and usufructs instead of corporations. There are also a number of economic models that are not pure markets but mix in markets, you have planned-market economies, indicatively planned economies, participatory economies, etc...
Private ownership over the means of production, means the owners get to decide what to make, how to make, when to make, why to make, who gets to make, and what to do with the things that are made as they get to own those too. Private ownership of the workplace means people don't control their workplaces and their work, the owners and their representatives do. Private ownership of society's resources means the people don't get to decide how land is used, or if rare earth metals are used to make computers or to make electric car batteries or whatever, or what to do with any natural resources, no, the private owners get to decide. Then the state serves as enforcers, using police and military, for the ownership classes claims on their private property and the power that comes with it.
Wage labor is sometimes called wage slavery, because you are indirectly being forced to labor, if you do not or cannot perform labor that the owners find useful in exchange for money they have accumulated, then they will withhold the food, water, housing, healthcare, and other needs and modest wants from you, and leave you to suffer and die (just like how slaves would be made to work or they will have suffering or death inflicted upon them). Then the majority of those who do work are only paid enough to survive and be able to work the next day (even slaveowners realized they needed to keep their slaves alive and able to work), with maybe the occasional bonus (a reward to motivate the wage slaves), though many are not even given that much and must go into debt to the very ownership class that underpaid them to begin with, meaning they are locked into future labor and what little the worker class has can be taken away. Of course, the employee has no right to refuse the demands of their employer and no democratic control over their work and workplace. Of course chattel slavery was far more direct and cruel than wage labor, but the parallels are unmistakable.
Nothing about capitalism is democratic, it is purely authoritarian, with the ownership class being the authority in charge.
It's hard for me to be optimistic about the future. I feel like if we reached an economic singularity, I would still be just as poor and miserable as I am today. The wealth I generate is never for me.
This is absolutely a great shot on what might lay ahead of us as a species. Thought provoking. Thank you for making this video. This will be one of my favorite videos.
th-cam.com/video/fpKsygbNLT4/w-d-xo.html
Personally, I feel progress works like a stepping ladder. A new form of understanding or tech is found and it unlocks a plethora of applications.
For AI, I personally feel that the prerequisite would be something akin to a quantum computer. Something that can do these hundreds of millions of computations in a matter of seconds or quicker.
5 years or less. We'll see an AI play humanity like a chessboard. Cant say who itll be though :p
A hint of schizo goes a long way
Like the warmind in destiny. Computing everything.
In this case you might like my video on my Theory.
th-cam.com/video/ERR82MePb4g/w-d-xo.html
Quantum computers are the technology of the future, and they always will be.
Here is a crazy sci-fi thought that is unlikely, but who says the computations have to be incredibly fast to be incredibly powerful (even though some of the internet is incredibly fast anyway). The internet could give birth to AI seeing as all the computers connected could emulate neurons and all the connectivity synapses. All it would take is the right bit of randomness to give birth to it or the right bit of learning software to become like a virus and start spreading out. All these phones, computers, tv's, etc, all interconnected.
This was such an incredible video! The animations, the breath of knowledge and subjects covered, all of it! Just totally brilliant! Amazing content; I have insta-subbed!
given the events of last few weeks ... info on getting closer to AGI in couple decades .... this didn't age well lol.
Great video tho!
I feel like we need a synthesis between AI researchers and people who study the brain's innate, evolved learning mechanisms
A human child typically needs 1 example of a giraffe to "learn" the category
While you insinuate a child’s brain is simple, a human brain, after all, is perhaps the most highly advanced computational device the universe has ever created.
@@snivesz32 That we know of.
@@snivesz32 I don't think a child's brain is simple at all - and the complexity may be why it needs 1-2 examples to learn something instead of a massive image database.
This is overplayed. We have a lot of people studying psychology or neuroscience and not giving us reproducible data. The real power is the engineers/programmers/mathematicians figuring it out on their own.
Most of the “AI” we see now is primarily complex math, not traditionally like our (poor) understanding of the human brain.
Glad I found your channel. The changes ahead will be staggering. I often wonder how we as individuals and a species will handle it emotionally and psychologically. People often make important decisions based on this despite logical reasoning., that is the wild card that isn’t taken into consideration and can lead us down a path of unintended consequences . We are emotional animals first and foremost, overlooking that can lead to disaster.
We must be fluid and optimistic! Good luck!!
is a must for humanitarian reasons. It will revolutionize everything so quickly that it will have to be rolled out in communities first to experiment with the psychological effects in a controlled manner. People will find other things to be envious and I don't know exactly what that will be if everybody can have materialism as a non-factor what does that do to society the people become nice or destructive?