Economics is descriptive, not prescriptive. The whole concept of “a job” is made up and arbitrary.
You say an AGI would need to do everything a human can. Great, here are some things that humans do: love, think, contemplate, reflect, regret, aspire, etc. these require consciousness.
Also, as you conveniently ignored, philosophy, politics, science are among the most important non-family-oriented “jobs” we humans do. They require consciousness.
Plus, if a machine does what it’s told, then someone would be telling it what to do. That’s a job that a machine cannot do. But most of our jobs are already about telling machines what to do. If an AGI is not self-directed, it can’t tell other machines what to do, unless it is itself told what to do. But then someone is telling it what to do, which is “a job.”
A job is a task one human wants another to accomplish, it is not arbitrary at all.
philosophy, politics, science are among the most important non-family-oriented “jobs” we humans do. They require consciousness.
i don’t see why they do, a philosophical zombie could do it, why not an unconscious AI? alphaevolve is already making new science, I see no reason an unconscious being with the abilty to manipulate the world and verify couldn’t do these things.
Plus, if a machine does what it’s told, then someone would be telling it what to do. That’s a job that a machine cannot do. But most of our jobs are already about telling machines what to do. If an AGI is not self-directed, it can’t tell other machines what to do, unless it is itself told what to do. But then someone is telling it what to do, which is “a job.”
yes but you can give it large, vague goals like “empower humanity, do what we say and minimize harm.” And it will still do them. So what does it matter?
Why do you expect an unthinking, non-deliberative zombie process to know what you mean by “empower humanity”? There are facts about what is GOOD and what is BAD that can only be grasped through subjective experience.
When you tell it to reduce harm, how do you know it won’t undertake a course of eugenics? How do you know it won’t see fit that people like you, by virtue of your stupidity, are culled or sterilized?
Why do you expect an unthinking, non-deliberative zombie process to know what you mean by “empower humanity”? There are facts about what is GOOD and what is BAD that can only be grasped through subjective experience.
these cannot be grasped by subjective experience, and I would say nothing can possibly achieve this, not any human at all, the best we can do is poll humanity and go by approximates, which I believe is best handled by something automatic. humans can’t answer these questions in the first place, why should I trust something without subjective experience to do it any worse?
When you tell it to reduce harm, how do you know it won’t undertake a course of eugenics?
because this is unpopular, there are many things online saying not to… do you think humans are immune to this? When has consciousness ever prevented such an outcome?
How do you know it won’t see fit that people like you, by virtue of your stupidity, are culled or sterilized?
we don’t, but we also don’t with conscious beings, so there’s still no stated advantage to consciousness.
Economics is descriptive, not prescriptive. The whole concept of “a job” is made up and arbitrary.
You say an AGI would need to do everything a human can. Great, here are some things that humans do: love, think, contemplate, reflect, regret, aspire, etc. these require consciousness.
Also, as you conveniently ignored, philosophy, politics, science are among the most important non-family-oriented “jobs” we humans do. They require consciousness.
Plus, if a machine does what it’s told, then someone would be telling it what to do. That’s a job that a machine cannot do. But most of our jobs are already about telling machines what to do. If an AGI is not self-directed, it can’t tell other machines what to do, unless it is itself told what to do. But then someone is telling it what to do, which is “a job.”
A job is a task one human wants another to accomplish, it is not arbitrary at all.
i don’t see why they do, a philosophical zombie could do it, why not an unconscious AI? alphaevolve is already making new science, I see no reason an unconscious being with the abilty to manipulate the world and verify couldn’t do these things.
yes but you can give it large, vague goals like “empower humanity, do what we say and minimize harm.” And it will still do them. So what does it matter?
Why do you expect an unthinking, non-deliberative zombie process to know what you mean by “empower humanity”? There are facts about what is GOOD and what is BAD that can only be grasped through subjective experience.
When you tell it to reduce harm, how do you know it won’t undertake a course of eugenics? How do you know it won’t see fit that people like you, by virtue of your stupidity, are culled or sterilized?
these cannot be grasped by subjective experience, and I would say nothing can possibly achieve this, not any human at all, the best we can do is poll humanity and go by approximates, which I believe is best handled by something automatic. humans can’t answer these questions in the first place, why should I trust something without subjective experience to do it any worse?
because this is unpopular, there are many things online saying not to… do you think humans are immune to this? When has consciousness ever prevented such an outcome?
we don’t, but we also don’t with conscious beings, so there’s still no stated advantage to consciousness.
Oh my god. So the machine won’t do terrible immoral things because they are unpopular on the internet. Well ladies and gentlemen, I rest my case.
No, the machine will and so would a conscious one. you misunderstand. This isn’t an area where a conscious machine wins.
Tell me, if consciousness prevents this, why did humans do it?