The agents only have to be better than we are and we’re not very good. Same argument as self-driving.
Don’t fear change.
Don’t fear change.
My manager was dragging me through useless projects that went nowhere despite multiple people telling him "it ain't gonna work" while shooting down proposals that later turned out to be "high priority tasks required directly by upper management". And he's a well-paid, educated employee with years of experience. Don't even get me started on delivery guys who cannot read a simple instruction like "do not ring the bell, leave the package on the doorstep". They just follow a 50-line script and that's all they can do.
Whenever you mention that AI won't reach human intelligence, remember that this is the benchmark. Not Alexander the Great, it's the millions of people throwing their life savings ($1000 each) into Labubus. Long time ago there was a series of articles in my country about the costs of wedding receptions skyrocketing and some people taking out loans to pay that, and someone made a meme "robots will never have human intelligence!" with reply "bro, you took out a loan to pay for a wedding, I don't want your human intelligence".
Denying this reality is pure cope.
You are showing disagreements with your priorities (mostly money) as unintelligent. You're showing a lack of care and conscientiousness as unintelligent.
You're reducing intelligence to alignment with money and following instructions. Under that framing the argument is already won in favor of AI amd some vague effective maximizing of a cost function.
Many jobs are like this, so it's fine for employment. Maybe the vast majority of mankind was never suitable for reliable employment of the "cost function" style.
But I know two things:
1. Centralization should be avoided. The reality that AI can do most jobs is not a reason to concentrate power behind those portraying that or building AI. We still want local, ideally individual, empowerment. I don't see enough said about this. Maybe we can even say the system must be one people wish to opt in to, to maximize profit.
2. Intelligence is being very narrowly defined and humans value more than an INT score in the RPG sense. The more I meet people outside my belief circles, the more I realize the intelligence of some actions, in the sense of "logically deduced from a higher principle" not "aligned with my western white collar principles". The ultimate role of culture and humanity IS this principle exploration and to say we've reduced that exploration to "maximize X" is crazy.
At some point deciding fate of the company or system or state flows from principles embedded in cultures and that's in danger of being flattened away by optimizing outcomes with machines.
Vague and wishy washy, but its the clearest I can state it.
If the principle embedded in the culture of my manager is to do dumb shit that goes nowhere, then I'm not sure what goals we're achieving.
Denying that reality is pure cope.
Self-driving requires less holistic thinking than imagining, building, and evolving large scale systems. It requires abilities that LLMs do not have. It requires non-symbolic reasoning, intuition, etc. that are beyond LLMs.
Intuition exists outside the human brain?
No.
Imagine I am 200IQ, and I can solve things you can't comprehend.
You appear to be saying I should this be able to run any system, including the entire United States fed govt, and anyone who even questions if that may have bad effects should "not fear change".
The industrial revolution was Change, but so is cancer.
> Don’t fear change.
Change is inevitable.
What I understood from the comment is that Op fears the boiling frog scenario. [0]
If you don’t pay them, you can walk by feet. If they ban you, you can walk by feet. If their infrastructure is damaged, no one and nothing will be able to move.
Good point about infra, but that’s already the case with Cloudflare, GitHub, aws, etc
BTW, when (not if, but when) a war happens, they will become very nice targets to render this exact country completely disabled.
Humans are autonomous, distributed, and adaptable. In a package that weighs ~150 lbs, with very low energy requirements.
You literally cannot wipe them out without a sustained and incredibly expensive ground campaign, and even then it's not likely.
AI in a data center on the other hand... So easily disabled.
And voila. No cargo moved, no code changes or fixes, no medical diagnosis made,etc. A whole country is disabled.
I thought that was an interesting idea, but not something that could ever happen..
Re: war.. that’s why US spends orders of magnitude more on military than anyone else. If any infra is hit on US soil then im heading to the bunker because most of the world will have already been reduced to dust.
Single points of failure are a fact of life.
AI offers relative democratization. What’s going on with model competition is giving us more choice, not less.