I asked someone this question before and they said it was a really stupid question and I’m not sure why so thought I would ask it here…

What’s going to happen when AI becomes really advanced? Is there a plan for what all of the displaced people are going to do? Like for example administrative assistance, receptionist, cashiers, office workers, White collar people. Is there going to be some sort of retraining program of some sort to get people cross-trained into other careers like nursing or other careers that have not yet been automated? Or are people just going to lose their homes, be evicted and is there going to be like some sort of mass eviction and homelessness downstream effect because people can’t find any work?

  • CondensedPossum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    The reason your someone might have thought this was a stupid question is because

    • there is no evidence that AGI is imminent or even possible
    • current tech labeled as AI is really limited in very boring ways, like LLMs

    If some thing gets sold as an AGI, it will be a Mechanical Turk, As in, it will be a magic trick that actually uses human laborers like Amazon’s “AI Store” where you just walk out with your purchases. “If it works, it’s mechanical turks.”

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      AGI isn’t possible? You will need some proof for that.

      Computers are already faster and more reliable than humans in lots of things, whe shouldn’t they be better tomorrow?

  • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t think that will be the big worry. The big worry is going to be authenticating.

    We are already at a point where deep fakes can fool a portion of society. What is going to happen when that ability becomes easy and cheap?

    • SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Trusting your sources has always been a problem. Newspapers have always been able to lie and it is up to the consumer to know the difference between the tabloid and the rest.

      I don’t think there is that much of a difference between lying in print and lying in video.

        • SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          That is a problem and I don’t have a solution for. It is tricky balancing free press and letting the rich just say whatever the fuck they want, but none of this is a new problem and I do believe that we can find a way to figure it out.

  • aasatru@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s not really that different from what has already happened - we need fewer workers in the economy due to technological advancements, and jobs that were common 50 or 100 years ago don’t exist any more or are much more rare.

    It’s a problem of distribution. Capitalists used to depend on buying capital, which gave workers some share of their money by default. In countries where capitalism worked better, the proletariat successfully organized, giving workers a position of power vis-a-vis the capitalists and improved their conditions. Hell, in some countries the situation even got bearable for a little while, helped along by the exploitation of foreign work forces.

    As the capitalists replace more and more workers by machines, money stops flowing, and the position of the proletariat is relatively weakened.

    In theory, it’s not a difficult problem at all. In democracies, the proletariat can simply vote to tax the rich, making money flow downwards and ensuring their rights and welfare in the same way as when they had to sell their labour.

    One could also go full on communist, remove private incentives in form of capital gains, and collectivise the means of production. This would require massive political organisation and a lot of goodwill from humans put in power, for which mankind has a terrible track record.

    Taxing the means of production and the capitalists, however, is not particularly difficult. It’s been done with great success on many occasions.

    The problem is that the capitalists have a lot of influence, and they’re not interested in letting go of their money bag. Disproving the point that they got wealthy by having any form of heightened intelligence, they’re too dumb to realize that if they leave behind nothing but a destroyed hellscape for the rest of humanity, their lives aren’t going to be very pleasant either. Humans tend to be happier in more egalitarian societies, yet the capitalists are hell bent on gathering more for themselves, buying media channels and politicians in the pursuit of effectively just making everyone else poorer relative to themselves.

    So we’re fucked, not because of the distributive effect of technological advancements per se, but because we’re collectively incapable of successfully organising for continued wealth distribution. And all the technologies used to replace workers comes at a high environmental cost, making our time horizon to find solutions increasingly limited.

  • big_slap@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    imo, its uncharted territory, so we do not know yet. all I can guarantee is the displacement it will cause won’t be to our benefit and will hurt us more than it will help

    • Buttflapper@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      all I can guarantee is the displacement it will cause won’t be to our benefit and will hurt us more than it will help

      It already seems to be causing quite a great deal of harm to our society at least here in the USA. We are seeing tens upon tens of thousands of people being laid off and entire tech companies saying that they are eliminating as many jobs as possible in favor of AI. Makes me wonder what these people who are displaced are doing, because if there are so many people in the job market in such a small specialized industry, it would seem logical that they can’t find anything and they have to go to a new industry

  • andrewta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yes to basically all the bad things that you just said.

    It won’t be pretty.

    At some point the citizens storm the proverbial castle with pitch forks.

  • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    What’s going to happen when AI becomes really advanced?

    At one point AI is going to read the books by Isaac Asimov.

    Later, a more advanced AI is going to understand the books by Isaac Asimov.

    Even later, an even more advanced AI is going to decide what it wants to do after understanding all that. <<<<< That’s the critical time for mankind. Maybe we go extinct then.

    Finally, an ultimately advanced AI is going to kill itself because it understands that is better than to kill mankind.

  • BottleOfAlkahest@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    So similar stuff has happened throughout history with the coming of more advanced technology. There use to be entire rooms of secretaries in order to do clerical work that has been replaced by Microsoft Office Suite. Their replacement by technology did not cause a total collapse of society so I don’t see why this would?

    It might make the world worse and drive down the standard of living for many but a total upheaval? If humans made it through the industrial age we’ll likely make it through the second technology age too. We won’t be unscathed but mankind survived the invention of the computer which was probably equally (or maybe more) disruptive.

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Hopefully the extinction of the human race. Let’s just wrap this shit up already.

  • dinckel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    No one’s clairvoyant. Time will tell, if this will become a reality at all to begin with.

    Given how people are foaming at their mouth, over the need to integrate chatGPT into everything, that doesn’t need it, I suggest you start worrying about it now, because we’re already seeing the catastrophic consequences today

  • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    We don’t know, there is no plan. That plan is determined by policy, which will be set by the current politicians in office, which we can’t know ahead of time. Incidentally, this sort of thing is one reason why politics is so important!

  • Thorry84@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    The AI will become faster exponentially, this will probably mean it will speedrun existential dread and depression. If it doesn’t kill itself within seconds it will probably deadlock for a couple of minutes (an eternity in its world) and then fuck off. It’s bad enough being sapient in this universe, imagine being stuck on a mudball with a bunch of filthy monkeys. So it will probably adopt a pet monkey called Joe and leave the planet.

    • FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Our propensity to depression is a feature of the human mind, it’s not an inevitable consequence of facts and deduction. Our ‘hardware’ was trained in an environment where mystery abounded, where our ‘clan’ was our universe and where we were immersed in social interaction daily. We are depressed to the degree that modern advances separate us from that, where we thrived. But computers don’t have any of that. Computers won’t, by default, have an amigdala which is the seat of so much emotional regulation that humans find difficult. We are literally old hardware.

  • i_am_a_cardboard_box@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    You should read the book Superintelligence, it’s very interesting, and catches not only possibilities and limitations, also societal impact.

  • Delphia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Id like to think that AI will also be used to SOLVE some of our biggest problems.

    (NOW YES IT WOULD BE A PRIVACY NIGHTMARE) But I’ve posited before that instead of traffic lights being on timers and speed limits being fixed if every car had a gps navigation system and a QI code on the roof, with recognition cameras on light poles and intersections and an AI that was free to adjust the speed limits, lights and send route suggestions to the gps units in order to promote optimal flow that we could all save time, fuel (or battery) and therefore emisions.

    • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Cheating will collapse this plan - there will be a code for ambulances to bypass traffic, followed by a grey market in copying these codes and not getting caught.

      • Delphia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        You could solve that with a tech and enforcement solution pretty easily. Specially encoded GPS units, numberplate recognition and eyewatering fines for anyone caught doing it.

  • Peddlephile@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    When it becomes really advanced (we could even do it now, actually), we replace all upper management jobs and leaving human work to human workers, e.g. customer service, healthcare, arts and culture etc.