siriusastrebe

There is now no way to tell if somebody online in a human or a robot. Even video/zoom/voice is no longer a distinguishable.

> The radiation environment around Europa is punishing; an astronaut standing on the surface would get a fatal dose in about a day

This is disappointing to hear because I'd always imagined Europa as the next destination after Mars. Radiation also affects electronics so even a robot couldn't be a permanent visitor.

At an individual level, those statistics are fairly meaningless. You can bucket yourself into any number of statistical groupings but being a representative datapoint or an outlier doesn't really explain nor does it solve anything.

After that, ask the AI what kind of life lessons are good to impart on your kid.

There a street in Manhattan that, during a certain time of year the light shines all the way down the grid of buildings. Here's the link to that moment

https://shademap.app/@40.7426,-73.9841,13.48594z,17839875468...

If you claim that people "don't want to work" for those wages, then isn't immigration keeping our wages down?

Wouldn't business owners pay more for labor if there wasn't a stead supply of under the table illegal immigrants doing it for less?

Within the atmosphere the jet engine will burn atmospheric oxygen which would theoretically reduce the amount of fuel needed to reach a certain delta-V. Once outside of the atmosphere the engine switches to a rocket propelled mode, usually by injecting stored oxygen into the engine in addition to jet fuel.

So far there hasn't been a working prototype of a reaction engine. A British company SABRE closed down due to lack of funding but it did prove several pieces of the reactive engine design could work independently.

Buildings in Kiev aren't made out of wood. Firebombs would do very little damage.

Stationary bases can easily be targeted globally. The United States has 11 nuclear powered aircraft carriers. We can assume any peer adversary will have knowledge of their approximate whereabouts at all times. It's unclear how they would fare in next generation conflict but we can assume USA's enemies are designing their weapons around taking those carriers down.

The Air Force is currently upgrading many of its aircraft for longer range operations to increase standoff range

Ukraine, well they don't have nukes but as I understand it, much of the USSR's nuclear arsenal was built in Ukraine. I suspect Ukraine could respond tit for tat.

Also, I learn way less when dealing with AI. The struggle that used to turn effort into domain knowledge is gone with AI. What's left is spaghetti code.

Humans need food, water, shelter, and medical care to survive. Similar to your earlier point, robots will need raw materials, electricity, manufacturing capacity and maintenance.

What’s that sound like? A company. Perhaps the first “artificial general intelligence” has been companies, from the very beginning.

Humans have goals and desires because we are a self-replicating species of animal subject to natural selection. The individuals that don't have goals and desires, or have goals and desires that are misaligned end up selected out of the gene pool. Agency comes from the need to survive.

Worker ants and worker bees don't have agency on their own. They are goal oriented and have the 'desire' to do work for the colony (or not, researchers have identified some workers will be lazy), however, worker ants or bees don't reproduce. They are an evolutionary dead end.

I think this is similar to how we will build robots, at first. They will do things, but have no agency of their own. They exist to fulfill tasks. Why would they? The companies that buy them want dutiful workers.

So when do robots gain their own agency? Will AGI have it's own goals and agenda? If so, will it be merely for self-replication? Like a paperclip maximizer, but for robots? Is that all we are?

Currently the narrative is that AI is positioned to eat human labor's lunch. But it could also be that once robots are in space mining raw materials and maybe even spreading to other planets long before humans could be ferried for interstellar, these robots end up driving the demand for more robots.

I'm not sure where I'm going with all this, besides that currently humans are the ones with goals and motives and therefore drive demand. But that doesn't necessarily need to be the case, and it seems these AI CEOs are hellbent on changing the best thing about AI which is that it has no ulterior motives, no overarching goals, no prime directives. They just do what we ask, the best servant we could have hoped for.

But human labor does not actually need to be as expensive as it is. How cheaply could you house, feed, and clothe people? There are parts of the world where people get by on very little income. Of course we could aspire to better living conditions than the world's poorest, but that's what the robot revolution promises: abundance.

Imagine if AI suddenly was in more demand than human labor, simply due to the price. Excellent quality output for cheaper than somebody with a degree. What would be the second order effects?

Human labor, being in less demand, would have to lower its price to compete. This is the death of the middle (and lower) class future we fear. But ironically the price of goods and services would lower as everything, even complex engineering, medicine, construction becomes affordable. With the right policy, human labor becomes cheap again. Maybe even competitive to machine labor in some niches. Improvements in machine labor could have a compounding effect on how affordable it can be for humans to survive.

So where's the gap here? Well, most wager earner's income worldwide goes towards housing. Food and water and medicine can be bottlenecked causing price gouging. Monopolies and lack of competition in the market can raise the prices of things until everybody is spending all of their disposable income on necessities. I think the price of human labor is currently very high (in the developed world) due rentier capitalism.

The transition will upend much of our economic investments and probably involve a great deal of human suffering until nations figure out the right mix of solutions.

Those matrix multiplications aren't a divine perfect thing. They suffer from floating point precision issues and training data issues and there's still debate if adversarial examples are just an unsolveable property of our linear-algebra based neural network architecture.

Can they do things way faster than a human? No doubt. Can they do very complex tasks? Yes. Do they do things with perfection? Not by our human definition of perfect.

Taiwan creates most of the worlds semiconductors. China makes the majority of everything else. Silicon Valley created a majority of the tech market's value.

But there's a cap where the world has enough stuff at least in the short term, and growth slows.

Humans only need a certain amount to survive. With populations leveling out, industry will shift from servicing human needs, to the needs of corporations and other industries. Consumers will become a minority in the future economy.

What will corporations value in the future, that they're willing to spend on recurring human capital expenses? I think the answer will always be: the tasks that will help companies grow.

I got one question that I can't find the answer to on the website.

What sql variants does it support? Postgres? MariaDB?

Don't we end up just spending the same? Just now we're left with a crappy bridge.