Altman: `World should accept some bad things happening' for the benefits of AI | Hacker News Reader

Altman: `World should accept some bad things happening' for the benefits of AI

politico.com

I get where they're coming from. It would be a similar argument in favor of the Industrial Revolution. The question is where is this all going, we seem to be approaching the end game of the evolution of technology. This could be catastrophic for humanity as tech cannot align with how humans evolved. Humans are already a bottleneck for AI (with pro-AI people literally saying this), so where does that lead us? Billions of useless humans, which then lead to mass poverty, civil unrest and wars?

This is a tough question but what is certainly worrying is how determined these companies are to push forward despite potential consequences. It's not even anti-AI, it's anti-hubris and not letting them get away with irresponsible decisions that affect everyone.

Some of us may die, but it's a sacrifice Sam is willing to make.

The rich gets richer, and the poor gets poorer.

It's all about this, but people refuse to think about it, they prefer to think AI will become Skynet instead.

In our current era, most people would align with Altman. All he's saying is he ok with personal gain at the expense of others or the public.

That is exactly the mindset of most people and the philosophy underneath freemarket Capitalism.

That people elected the current administration is just a broad reflection of the American public's level of consciousness.

You can't just assert machiavellianism as the norm. Sam is an extreme edge case, and while the system itself may be machiavellian, the majority of people live within it despite disagreement with it, or even with active animosity toward it. That has been my experience my whole life. The only people who are actively expressing joy with capitalism come in 2 flavors: people who experienced something much worse in a country with a different system, and the uber-rich.

What other system besides capitalism exists in todays world ?

There is no other system today or in the past.

People have always traded, owned shares or goats or a humble house.

Capitalism is not defined by trade. Trade exists in all economic systems. Capitalism is defined by ownership of the means of production.

Most people in all human history owned the land they farmed. There were no papers or offices with titles, people just roamed anywhere they could with their goats and so on.

Centralised government is a relatively recent thing in terms of the human timeline.

> Most people in all human history owned the land they farmed.

I would argue this isn't actually true, though. Agriculture itself is a relatively recent thing in the human timeline, and centralized government developed simultaneously with it. Many argue that agriculture actually led to centralized government because it necessitated the concept of owning land, which requires some sort of centralized authority.

For a lot longer than that, nobody really owned the land and the economic systems were much more like socialism (in the economic sense, where the means of production is not owned privately) than capitalism.

> For a lot longer than that, nobody really owned the land and the economic systems were much more like socialism (in the economic sense, where the means of production is not owned privately) than capitalism.

The old rule was that if you lived on the land, it was yours, you owned it.

Today nobody in HK owns the land they live on or run their factories. Everything is leased from the government for 99 years. Are you really going to tell me that HK isnt capitalist ?

Of course not.

China also has some strange land is not owned but leased, are you really going to tell me they are communist because of the name and red flag ?

Of course not they are capitalist.

People are selfish, they do things for their own personal benefit and that my friend is definition of capitalism.

Have you got any proof that MOST people align with Altman ?

Whats the bet if you asked 10 people how or what is AI they would all give very different answers.

Most people havent a clue what AI is doing today or wants to do tomorrow.

According to several recent polls, a clear majority of the population in the US is concerned by AI development. A recent poll by Ipsos shows that 55% of the population would be in favour of slowing down its development. Polls in Canada and Europe show similar views.

People who believe in "Might makes Right" usually only do so while they hold the might. In America "Might makes Right" is a core belief of a large contingent of people.

AI makes people uncomfortable because it promises to disempower the vast majority of people. Altman thinks he's on the right side of that bargain. Most people agree with this kind of bargain, if they are on the right side of it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com