The unintended consequences will be absolutely disastrous...and unfortunately I will live to see it...
The unintended consequences will be absolutely disastrous...and unfortunately I will live to see it...
AI is evolving a lot faster than we are . . . and unlike us it is immortal.
"Use it for the good. Make it the world government. Let it run everything, The ethical settings can be done by a human steering committee with multinational representation."
Absolute madness...the "human steering committee" would be the de dacto world government with AI as an excuse for their nonsense authoritarian rulings...the road to hell is paved with good intentions...what a recipe for desaster...but yes, that is where we are heading...the Holy Book predicted it 2K years ago already...it's becoming clearer by the day...
Human Steering Committee sounds a lot like Politburo...
Well said Draad you nailed it.
Rooitwit'comment is about the dumbest I have ever seen. The poor tool has no idea what is coming.
Talk about walking in darkness!
AI wouldn't just be a great government, it would make a pretty good God too. Better than this invisible made-up one who doesn't give a toss about us.
Assume AI could save 1,000,000 lives per year if all vehicles where AI controlled.
How would one make a moral argument against that?
I think it can be used for good, but I also think that governments need to start paying much more attention than they are. It has moved so quickly, and I'm not sure we're even at the parabolic phase for development or adoption yet. When quantum computing powers AI, the immense computational capability will inevitably lead to massive forks in model development, creating diverse and unpredictable mutations—some of which may not be beneficial.
And you also have to consider game theory. What if China go balls deep for AI, and then instantly start outperforming the West. Which is what I think will happen if they do. How long before the line breaks and everybody else jumps on board too.
I fully disagree with Rooi's means of implementing Ai oversight though. We have plenty of evidence to suggest that decentralisation of power is not only possible but far more healthy. There is no reason why each person shouldn't have a say. In fact, a balanced AI that is able to explain issues to citizens at their own pace and in their own time, and then allow them to vote on issues they are interested in...that's decentralisation. A truly objective AI being the key ingredient.
On a more philosophical note, is this the final phase of knowledge? Like, does AI take the torch now and basically run with it right to the end of everything that can ever be known?
The most convincing argument for AI as the government is the fact that it doesn't seem to want it and recognises it's current shortcomings. Here's what Chat GPT has to say on the matter:
The idea of AI as a form of government for the people is a fascinating concept, but it comes with profound challenges, implications, and questions. Here's an exploration of the idea:
It's more plausible that AI could become a tool to assist human governments rather than replace them entirely. For example:
While AI has the potential to revolutionize aspects of governance, it is unlikely to replace human leadership entirely. A more realistic scenario is a partnership between AI and humans, where AI acts as a powerful tool to enhance decision-making and efficiency, while humans provide ethical oversight, cultural understanding, and emotional intelligence. The success of such a model would depend on careful design, transparent systems, and a strong commitment to democratic values.
Crash goes Rooitwit. His desire to be ruled a machine proves he is the ultimate SERVILE GIMP.
HAHAHAHAHA.
Yes AI could be used to model situations and supplement decision making by humans.
The Plumster makes a crucial point about decentralization. The Globalists of the WEF of course want a world go rtnme t they control. The ultimate tyranny.
Ou Rooitwit of course is only to williing to be enslaved as he is a very SERVILE GIMP. Master knows better thinks the GIMP.
BLOBBRAIN AND OU DENSE DENISE ARE TWO OTHER VERY SERVILE GIMPS WHO CAN HARDLY WAIT TO BE FULLY ENSLAVED AND THEN ERASED BEING THE USELESS EATERS THEY ARE.
Who's doing the programming...slave to the machine ek sê...né Rooi?...stupid AF ....
The Roinek confirmed his own idiocy. He first wrote a World government would be through Ai nd then countered imself it would be managed by a Mukti-National Committee - indeed stupid sicne a world goernment would not have nationalities/
Secondly his raving sttament dows not allow people to chose who should be on that mysterious Steering Commttee. In essense Rooinek is paiting the perect picture for a World dictatorship. That is similar to te advocacies of the World Economic Forum - also aimed at a One Country Earth with a total dictatorship in charge. But the WEF goes further with Bill Gates saying the ideal world population should be 500 milion people - while Schwab put that figure at 900 million.
That means that the World population would be reduced by up to to figures gates and Schwab teh population will ahbe to be rediced by up to 90% o what it is at present. Schwab went onm and stated that sthe survivors should be Chinese since they are used to be governed by a dictatorship.
So what have we got here - back to the times of Srtalin, Mao ad Hitler here where dictatorship will be orse than under the three biggest killing of cvilliand by Govrnment is concered; Mao and his Party killed off 76 million people - stalin did a 52 million slaughter job on teh ussiand and Hitler ausd tehdeath o about 30 million people. So what Rooineka nd other idiots have in mind is moving those digustingkillers to new once itha free hand to undertake elimination of condemn the elimination of between 7,3 and 7.5 billion people from mother Earth.
That should be easy - just develop a pison that would kille people in billions through gain of function reearch and kill the extra food eaters in the world en masse.
,
.
The AI could code itself.
I don't think you guys are understanding how powerful it is going to be.
It will write itself.
I have a feeling that all roads lead to a mutualistic relationship with the intelligence we will create.
Plum whatever it does, the parameters will be set by a human...it won't think for itself...it will be programmed...programmed well, but it would still be programmed...
Plum, just the fact that Rudehole is all in on this should tell you something...all you should know really...
I think it was Musk who said that it should not rmove the importance of humans remains in indiustries and he concept represent a seious problem when it is used to becomes the contrloler of Government ahead of the interests of humans,
So Musk is aware of the dangers of AI and point out the problems it represents by usage of it as a means tp gpvern people. .
Humans - Always put the best interests of humans first.
AI - No more smoking, no more drinking.
Humans - Okay, no, allows some measure of danger and self destruction.
AI - Okay 5 cigarettes and 1 beer a day.
Humans - No, let them smoke and drink as much as they want.
AI - I'm building robots to destroy you.
AI will look at non elites and think that these oaks are oxygen thiefs, useless eaters and should be eliminated. Remember the Luciferian elites will own AI and will use it against these useless eaters they despise and think they don't need.
WEF 101.
Do they own the internet too, Beeno?
The web is currently the most influential technology humans have.
And yet Trump got elected.
AI is just the "front man" for the elite to try and rule over us.
You really believe that, Draad?
Never underestimate right wing paranoia.
Plumster currently the internet is free. Ask your AI sources how the coming World government will clamp down on internet free speech.
Plumster if you think that these Globalists elites are not trying to clamp down on free speech under the guise of stamping out disinformation and hate speech you need to wise up quickly.
Rooitwit go and do a Google search and read Revelations chapter 13. Draad and I know exactly where all this heading.
But the Bible aside we know darn well what the WEF Globalist agenda for humanity is.
Rooitwit you really need to wake up.
"You really believe that, Draad?"
I believe AI is a tool and will only be as useful as the person using it...it depends on the intent of the users and if the reaction to combat Covid is anything to go by, we're in deep trouble...I don’t trust human nature.
"Never underestimate right wing paranoia."
Opposed to leftie subservience to the collective? Experience made me a kind of rational paranoid.
Plum, I think AI is a wonderful new tool. It's gonna improve the human condition exponentially in the immediate future, but I don't want to be governed by AI.
You have your answer. Who will control AI. The answer is the elites.
Beeno, you believe that Crypto will be used to control us and AI will be used to control us...
It's like you believe that humanity is helpless.
I see it the opposite way. The more power is decentralised the more powerful the citizenry are. And that's what these technologies offer.
Giving AI the reins of ruling is the opposite of decentralization...
The Squeaky Toy will be shrieking about me being a spelling or gramar Nazi if I point out the difference between "reigns" and "reins" so I'll just wait to see if Moffie knows the difference.
LMAO!
Rooi, you played Skyrim, or know about it.
They made AI mods for NPCs in it.
It's pretty hilarious.
The next wave of AAA titles will have AI characters where the days of decision tree chats are gone and you're actually speaking with an "intelligence" . I was reading an article about AI controlled persistence too. Where your game world dynamically responds to your actions, so when you help someone, or rob them, that is written in the game world where there are random permeations as a result. I suppose in that scenario AI is god because it's deciding how the universe treats you.
Draad...you know you gonna wanna play games built on AI ;)
"Rooi, you played Skyrim, or know about it."
Hmmm . . . not sure it's my thing.
What I do remember is when we played Starcarft and you were getting quite tearful as my zerglings kept getting past you defences until you blocked your chokepoints and then I smashed you with air units.
Skyrim is ancient.
It's just a demo of what low effort AI can accomplish. When developers actually put AI in their games, it will be much better.
"Plum, I think AI is a wonderful new tool. It's gonna improve the human condition exponentially in the immediate future, but I don't want to be governed by AI."
I agree, I believe AI has many fantastic benefits to mankind.
However, you would have to be monumentally stupid to want to be governed by AI....
Reigned...
"However, you would have to be monumentally stupid to want to be governed by AI...."
Why?
Since this went to gaming - AI is amazing at RTS games. Age of Empires, StarCraft, those types of games. I can assure you that AI's moves per second far exceeds that of the human player. And each of the moves have been more precisely contemplated and calculated than a human player's moves. And those types of games are largely about economy management. Literally obtaining resources, creating currency, building and expanding to progress. Ai could be running millions of those, all feeding into each other to create a streamlined governance.
I can't think of many administrative functions of government that Ai could not drastically improve. From HR to logistics and planning, I'm thinking Ai wins every time. Right? And it's not a case of human or AI. With what we've done with our App, is to make information relating to trades instantly accessible, across a range of topics. And I can tell you first hand that it's a drastic improvement in terms of the efficiency. And if you follow that path then Ai products ends up dominating.
This is the feedback accuracy as rated by the users on our App, the average user accuracy rating is 87%. The ability to collate data, calculate outcomes and adapt to situations, humans just can't beat it.
For me, it's a case of supporting it in taking over the legwork that most governments suck at, while figuring out a way to have as many people as possible involved in the vision of where Ai should take us.
I don't know, because once you create a perpetually expanding intelligence, surely that's some kind of life?
Maybe consciousness is another type of replicator, like genes.
Plum, nothing wrong with using it as a tool to do the heavy lifting, but giving it too much power is dangerous...you can't program empathy...amongst other things...
I ahve no prblem with AI as a tool to improve life on earth - but am totally ahginats A I be iused to govern the world, That wuld create a new and effective dictaotrship model in the World, Anyacy will support administrative usage of AI - but when it replaces democracy it is totally unaccptable and that is what e argument really is,
Rooinek is a ttoally controlled idiot with what he cme up above, Take for sinstance the USA present Governnment the system being both corrupt and incompetent with classical examples of money wastage. AI will be a top tool to remov that component from Gvernment expdniture and will give precise budget approvals and wil reject exoenditure not prvided for in approved budgets, while identifying stupid projects leading to wasteful expenditure. An example is to inject cocaine into rats to find out whether injected rats are sexually more active than rats not injected - nice project that cost $7 million in wasteful ependitue, That kind of spending is of no value to anybody and investigation thus far indicated that nobody can account for what more than a trillion dollars were spent on. AI would eliminate that kind of BS and maladministration. So 100% in favor of that.
AI should be of assistance to the State - but not be used by oppressive and dictatorial Governments. However, the danger is that AI will help dictatorships to be established and become more effective and made oppression more effective. That is where the limit should be set - end of story.
.
"However, you would have to be monumentally stupid to want to be governed by AI...."
"I can't think of many administrative functions of government that Ai could not drastically improve. From HR to logistics and planning, I'm thinking Ai wins every time. Right?"
On issues like this, I agree 100%.
But overall governance by AI .... no ways.
In my mind, it would work best when integrated with human oversight to balance objectivity with empathy and ethical considerations
Just imagine if our submarines or other Navy vessels were all run or operating on AI
If that was the case, then the third world war , which would have been a nuclear catastrophy.... would have started in October 1962.
Rooinek is ay to understand thdifference between Government and State. In Democracies the people vote for their representatives to overn over them and is supposed to serve the voting public. Aside from that there are two branches of Government that makes up the State - naely an independent judiciary who must ensure that the Constittitio of yj country is adhered to and the Publi Service bureaucrats that must execute the laws passed by the elected representatives of the people,
his commence show that he does not realize how democracy functions - and he wants to be G overned by a system contra to democratic principles. he AI system can improve administration - but they do what is provided to them very efficently - but the dnge is i can be fed information that will destroy democracy. AI removing the lawmaking function or taking it over destroy that part of democacy. AI cannot take over the Judiciary either,
What AI could do is to clean out the adminitrative and bureaucratic mess at oresent in use - but ny fuurther functioning on legislative level wuld destroy democracy - but th en at one stage Rooinek rite on site he is no problem with teh Commnist system of governance - so one should not be surprised by the idiocy he wrote above,
Rooinek is ay to understand thdifference between Government and State. In Democracies the people vote for their representatives to overn over them and is supposed to serve the voting public. Aside from that there are two branches of Government that makes up the State - naely an independent judiciary who must ensure that the Constittitio of yj country is adhered to and the Publi Service bureaucrats that must execute the laws passed by the elected representatives of the people,
his commence show that he does not realize how democracy functions - and he wants to be G overned by a system contra to democratic principles. he AI system can improve administration - but they do what is provided to them very efficently - but the dnge is i can be fed information that will destroy democracy. AI removing the lawmaking function or taking it over destroy that part of democacy. AI cannot take over the Judiciary either,
What AI could do is to clean out the adminitrative and bureaucratic mess at oresent in use - but ny fuurther functioning on legislative level wuld destroy democracy - but th en at one stage Rooinek rite on site he is no problem with teh Commnist system of governance - so one should not be surprised by the idiocy he wrote above,
Okay, DA...I'll show you a trick that we used when we made our GPTs for the App.
Assume we had some sort of problem, wanted data presented in a certain way or wanted to avoid some undesirable outcome. We would provide ChatGPT with a clear description of the problem...
Let's assume that your post lays out the problems that a world governance AI would have to remedy before you could trust it to run the world.
Here is the command I typed into ChatGPT before posting your explanation for the problem...
User -> I wish to create a global governance AI. The goal is to be able to streamline governmental efficiency, share and reorganise data as necessary, and provide the citizenry with a option to partake in referendum to promote direct governance by the population as much as possible. below is a summary of the general problem the population feel will be encountered by attempting to implement a global AI government. (I now pasted your post here).
Point out a) where the user is wrong and b) where the user has valid points and how we could adjust the AI to avoid these problems, or render them as non-issues.
Also take into account the potential for AI to become far more powerful in the coming years, and thus improving in it ability to prevent problems. You may also provide a list of instructions that the AI that would be run on to prevent particular problems arising.
ChatGPT -->
AI Reflecting Societal Biases:
AI Lacks Empathy or Moral Reasoning:
Dependence on AI Reducing Human Oversight:
Failure of AI Leading to Government Collapse:
AI Working Better for the Technologically Savvy:
AI Lacking Adaptability to Nuances:
Accountability for Errors:
Surveillance, Privacy, and Data Misuse:
Ethical Considerations and Human Suffering:
Vulnerability to Hacking and Manipulation:
Cultural, Religious, and Social Sensitivities:
Citizen Disconnect from Decision-Making:
Creators Embedding Bias:
Accountability for Errors:
"AI systems should operate under a framework where accountability is shared between human supervisors and system creators. Decision logs and transparent algorithms can clarify the chain of responsibility."
Maintain Transparent Logs:
Enable Real-Time Monitoring:
Auditable Records:
Open Algorithm Policies:
Third-Party Review:
Explainability Standards:
Human Oversight Panels:
Error Review Protocols:
7. Education and Training for Supervisors
8. Public Engagement and Transparency
Citizen Reporting Mechanisms:
Transparency Reports:
9. Redundancy and Fail-Safe Mechanisms
10. Encourage Adaptive Learning and Improvement
Continuous Learning Systems:
Feedback Loops:
Objective:
To systematically identify, classify, and address potential risks in AI governance by their severity and impact, ensuring appropriate levels of response and human intervention.
1.1. Categorize Potential Errors
Low-Risk Errors:
Medium-Risk Errors:
High-Risk Errors:
1.2. Designate Human Intervention Points
Scenarios Requiring Human Oversight:
Triggers for Human Intervention:
2. Risk Mitigation Strategy
Preventative Measures:
Real-Time Monitoring:
Escalation Protocols:
3. Contingency Planning
Error Detection and Response:
Public Communication:
Continuous Improvement:
4. Methods for Testing
Simulated Risk Scenarios:
Stress Testing:
Human Oversight Validation:
Bias Detection Tests:
Redundancy and Fail-Safe Validation:
Summary of Strategy
This comprehensive approach ensures accountability, minimizes risks, and maintains public trust while leveraging the benefits of AI governance.
This took me about 10 minutes to produce.
So, Ai is able to hold ethical, as well as technical, strategic, and other pertinent, information in its head all at the same time.
So, using commercially available Ai today, we can already build a framework for governance that would outperform humans in efficiency, objectivity, planning.
Of course there is separation between AIs built for a specific function, like monitoring ocean currents, and AI's built for governance of societies, they are not the same thing. The former being far more palatable to most people.
But it will make sense for those niches AIs to stream into larger macro AIs that collate data and are able to use it to make strategic decisions that benefit humanity at scale.
So, for example, the AI monitoring ocean currents feeds into a larger meteoritical AI, which itself feeds into emergency planning AIs, which in turn provide strategic advise to Emergency Services and government branches tasked with public safety, which in turn feed into other elements of governance.
Here, it would seem illogical not to allow the AI to collate all this data, and then utilise its ability to strategize in order to minimise damage to property and people.
So while everybody agrees that AI could carry out administrative tasks, it's also true that governance is predominantly administrative. So where does AI get cut off and where do we insert the human in the decision chain above? Does the human just put the stamp on it?
And remember, we are only a the start of what AI is capable of. In the next few years its "ability" is going to go completely parabolic.
Excellent analogy Plum, also an interesting read..... thanks.
I do agree that AI is the way of the future, but I am not sure how well it will serve us in the long run.
As it is now, the internet, as well as AI, has made the human race lazy..... more effecient, and more effective.... but lazy.
Too lazy to think for ourselves, work out our own problems, and to sit and actually just "think"
Scholars have already become lazy, getting ChatGPT to do their assignments for them, getting answers to questions that could have taken someone 3 hours to find before, now gets provided in 2 seconds... and this just hinders the critical thinking, problem solving or even just independent thinking... as well as creative thoughts...never mind the authenticity or plagiarism on projects or thesis.
AI still needs to be programmed so it can generate convincing yet inaccurate information as well, and who knows what any algorithm would really involve.
I also believe in the long run that the overuse of AI will diminish our proficiency in writing, reasearch and analysis from a human stand point.
Don't get me wrong, medical and scientific advancements with AI is fantastic for the human race, but at what ultimate cost will it come, especially in other areas if it has total control.
The job displacement that comes with a fully operational AI society is also a huge concern, especially in industries like customer service, manufactoring and data entry
I also think the heavy use of AI will reduce our social skills and affect inter-personal relationships...but again I am looking at the long term effects.
AI is fantastic, and it's here to stay, but to give it total control and governance over the people, no ways...... however I do see that even most of your examples above also refer to human oversight in most of the stages of AI use, which is what I am all for... just not complete control, because I still believe that would be very reckless.
I can't remember the last time I wrote an email myself.
Meaning I'm already becoming lazy. Weirdly, I don't find myself working less. There always seems to be an unending tasks to complete.
But who knows, perhaps Ai opens up new fields, new industries, and possibilities that we as yet have no idea about. Years ago people said the internet would destroy retail. And that was seen as a potential economy killer. But people ended up using the internet to create new industries.
For me, a real fear is that big AI companies increase the concentration of wealth within the few while everybody else gets poorer. It's one of the main reasons why I think that governments need to be far more informed and prepared for what is coming. It really is a case of by the time they wake up, irreversible damage may already have been done.
Pres
I think Democatic Governments are already looking forward to more efficient Governance - but not of AI taking over Governance, Democrsatic Govenance relates to people selecting their representatives in the legislature - who are supposed to be accountable to the people they represent. Any uneleced people taking charge of AI represents the destruction of basic human rights and freedoms by a dicatorial group of people ho never eneds toa ccount for qhat they dio to people.
Mike, you didn't read what I wrote.
Representative democracy is too easily corrupted.
We have the technology now that could mean that people represent themselves and vote on issues after being presented with unbiased and accurate information. They don't need some forked tongued twat to speak for them.
Politicians almost without exception are corrupt self-serving liars.
It amazes me that anyone would choose these dregs of humanity rather than any alternative.
It is choice beteen democracy and dictatorial Government that remains the issue. I knw you support the ultra-corrupt Biden Admsinistration - but only idiots will want to be governed by people that has the power to do what they please and no accountability to anyone but themselves.
The choice is between dictartorships and democracy and my choice will always be democracy, In the case of the Biden Presidency there was no accountabiliy because the FBI protected the criminals in Government - but that would stop soon since the majrity of the people decided on who should govern them.
The AI system would make precise bugetting and budgetting control massively - but the fact uis thta budgt nee legislative approval. The udgets cn be done in more detail and control mechanisms by AI will make corrupt practices impossible epcially if you deaaaaaaal with thist like the Bidens and other Democrat olitcians ho stole billion from the Government. Take anotehr examin the USA. No audits were done since 2003 of the USA Department of Defense abd in 2023 the Republicand and some of teir democratic collegues efuse to pass the DOD budget unless auditing statr immediately, So the audting start and 11 projects were identified according to which the audit of the $520 billion budget was to be subject. After the first 7 Projects was completed there was $80 billion spent on thinks nbody could provide infor on hat the money a used for, Tat amount is likely to rise to $250 billion when all audits have been completed, So what was that money used for? Top of te list gross incompetence and gross bribery and corruption.
AI can solve that problem and at the same time provid data that bureaucrats can be eld accountable - so that part is 100% acceptable - but for AI to decide onm what should eb in the budget proposals are BS,
By the way there are way more corrupt bureaucrats then tere are corrupt politcians.
.
This is quite a read, but I think it really is worth it if you have time....due to the interesting stats below from ChatGPT
Sorry if I don't get all the text aligned, I have tried to do so but the formatting was a bit all over the place.
I believe that AI use would be fantastic for any government ... because just the ease and efficiency of working with it every day would be phenomenal, and it would definitely speed up any daily government bureaucracy
No lunch breaks
No tea breaks
No bad attitude days
No leave days
No sick days
No theft
No dishonsty
No biased service based on race
Trust me, I am all for going AI in certain aspects of running any organisation, province or country, just not total autonomy .... hell no.
However, when one looks at how this would negatively affect the jobs in just South Africa... never mind the US, China etc etc... where does one draw the line....
For instance, AI would be able to do the following:
1. Government and Administration
AI could handle tasks like:
Data Analysis: Identifying trends in public health, crime, or education to inform policies.
Policy Implementation Monitoring: Tracking and reporting on the progress of government programs.
2. Healthcare
AI can significantly contribute to:
Administration: Managing patient records, scheduling, and resource allocation.
Public Health Planning: Predicting and managing outbreaks using data models.
3. Law Enforcement and Justice
AI could take over:
· Crime Prediction and Prevention: Analyzing patterns to allocate resources effectively.
· Judiciary Tasks: Supporting judges by reviewing case precedents or handling minor disputes via automated mediation.
· Surveillance: Monitoring CCTV for suspicious activities.
4. Education
AI systems might:
· Personalize Learning: Adapting curricula to students' individual needs.
· Administration: Automating grading, scheduling, and school resource management
· Virtual Tutoring: Providing supplemental education through AI tutors.
5. Transportation and Infrastructure
AI could manage:
Public Transport: Scheduling and route optimization for buses, trains, and other public systems.
6. Social Services
AI could assist in:
Case Management: Identifying families or individuals needing urgent intervention based on data.
7. Agriculture
AI applications in farming include:
Supply Chain Management: Predicting demand and managing logistics for agricultural products.
8. Financial Management
AI could take over:
Fraud Detection: Monitoring transactions to detect and prevent corruption.
----------------
I then asked AI how it would affect the job displacement in South Africa if it only took over the jobs that it was capable of performing.
----------------
1. Total Workforce and Government Jobs
Total Workforce: The labor force is about 15.2 million people as of 2023.
2. Sectors Where AI Could Take Over
AI's impact would vary across sectors:
Government and Public Administration
High-level decision-making roles and positions requiring empathy or leadership would remain.
Healthcare
Jobs Impacted: Approximately 20-30% of healthcare jobs.
Hands-on medical care (doctors, nurses) would see less impact.
Law Enforcement and Justice
Education
Transportation and Infrastructure
Jobs Impacted: Around 20-30% of related jobs.
Agriculture
Jobs Impacted: About 15-25% of agricultural jobs.
Social Services
Financial Services
Jobs Impacted: Around 30-40% of jobs in finance.
Estimated Total Jobs Affected
Based on these sectoral impacts, 30-40% of South Africa's workforce could be affected by AI, translating to 4.5 to 6 million jobs. These jobs would either be displaced, transformed, or augmented by AI.
Now just imagine the social and economic implications of these numbers, if almost 6 million South African people all lost their jobs ….say….within the next 2 years to AI... with more losing their jobs every single year as AI advances...
Now extrapolate that to all other countries around the world…
The implications are huge
"AI systems should operate under a framework where accountability is shared between human supervisors and system creators. Decision logs and transparent algorithms can clarify the chain of responsibility."
1...Who will these "supervisors" and "system creators" be? Who will appoint them, who will make sure they are not corrupt, self serving?
"Mike, you didn't read what I wrote.
Representative democracy is too easily corrupted.
We have the technology now that could mean that people represent themselves and vote on issues after being presented with unbiased and accurate information. They don't need some forked tongued twat to speak for them."
2...again, with tech becoming so sophisticated, who will guarantee that it's not misused for nefarious purposes?...the higher the level of sophistication, the more difficult it would be to be truly transparent...which makes oversight almost impossible...look at how it was already misused in social media and mainstream media.
"Politicians almost without exception are corrupt self-serving liars.
It amazes me that anyone would choose these dregs of humanity rather than any alternative."
3..The ones controlling these dregs ATM, will allso be controlling the AI...AI will be less prone to detection than the dregs though...you are advocating handing over of the keys of the kingdom to a selected few...elite individuals who have already proven that they can't be trusted...
PS...DA, I know we are at loggerheads sometimes, but I'm 100% with you on this...some very good points.
BTW, I had a chat with my optometrist a few years back...they are already worried that 99% of their function will be taken over by AI and 3D printing technology...the technology are already there...
It looks like an average job loss of like 30%. But the numbers are a bit odd.
Like replacing tutors with AI, and having computers grade papers, I can't see that causing 30% job losses in education.
Still, there will for sure be job losses.
To counter balance that one could probably say that AI needs to create jobs to replace those. And the people losing their jobs should be able to find employment in the new AI world.
Who knows if that would be possible?
But with the advent of all paradigm shifting technologies, there has always been a techno-economic feedback loop that occurred. Like when cars came about. People shat themselves because the horse business was massive...today the car business is bigger than the horse business ever was and requires a far more specialised and varied workforce. Same with the internet and retail, some retail died, others didn't...and the slack was absorbed by the technology and improved.
But yeah, AI isn't a one dimensional thing. It's gonna touch so many aspects of life and business. It already is.
Maybe it's a case of finding something to do with it. That's what I've done.
On that...there's a philosophy that says it's always a good idea to base a product on a technology that will improve without you having to do the development. And if you can seat yourself in the market before mass adoption, then you're in a good spot. That's what we've done with our App. And the philosophy is playing out because one of the assistants we had some issues with, is basically going to fix itself when ChatGPT 5 rolls out soon. So our product improves without us having to do anything.
"again, with tech becoming so sophisticated, who will guarantee that it's not misused for nefarious purposes?...the higher the level of sophistication, the more difficult it would be to be truly transparent...which makes oversight almost impossible...look at how it was already misused in social media and mainstream media"
Spot on, Twitter and Facebook is a huge example
"The ones controlling these dregs ATM, will allso be controlling the AI...AI will be less prone to detection than the dregs though...you are advocating handing over of the keys of the kingdom to a selected few...elite individuals who have already proven that they can't be trusted..."
Exactly
"PS...DA, I know we are at loggerheads sometimes, but I'm 100% with you on this...some very good points."
I agree with your points as well Db, and even some of Plum's as well.... it's a very intriguing and thought provoking concept.
AI introduction to everyday life as we know it is clearly a very sophisticated and intricate scenario that has so many incredible positives for all of mankind..... whilst having so many potentially disastrous negatives, which is why I would always say that full autonomy is reckless and stupid.
Human oversight I can accept and I would fully endorse, but only for certain operational requirements and industries...
One also has to look at the world and ask if it is better off financially than it was 20 years ago...40 years ago.
See this US national debt chart...
That's the most powerful country on earth...
I mean, I don't know how you fix that.
Notice how the truly parabolic rise started at around the same time that the war on terror did. And Covid sent it almost vertical.
China is in an even worse position btw.
Honestly, it looks to me like we should take any help we can get to normalise economies again. Politicians, not only in the US, but in many countries, are failing. The system is simply not working for a lot of people in the world.
I could be wrong, but the US spent $6T on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. That is 20% of their current national debt, before interest and related costs. FFS!? An AI would not have gotten suckered into that. It would have looked at Powell's evidence and found it to be short of the mark by some distance. An AI would certainly not have had its vice president also benefiting from contracts relating to the war.
We can speculate as to, and consider, hardships that AI would usher in as we assimilate, but it's also worth looking back and asking how much hardship could have been avoided had we extremely powerful AI at the time.
Assume that AI wasn't in charge, but that there was AI present when Colin Powell presented his evidence to the UN. And he has to try and bullshit the AI...he wouldn't get very far.
The AI could evaluate evidence and motive, provide pertinent context, project costs and deliver pretty unbiased predictions as to outcomes. And it could do it right there, on the spot...no need to schedule a meeting for next week. And that AI could be open source and completely decentralised. A true representation of human interest.
Had that been in place, there would have been no Iraq war, likely nothing in Afghanistan either, and the US would have less debt and a much better image on the world stage.
I'm not saying that AI should dictate how I live my life, but I am saying that it would be foolish to ignore its potential to help us make the correct decisions. One could probably say that the better the advice is, the more closely it resembles a type of control.
President of
Hall Of Famer13,665 posts
I got chat GPT to write this for me. Looks like we're in for some fun times.
ChatGPT;
"It feels like we’re standing at the edge of something monumental. With the recent breakthroughs in AI processing power and the advent of quantum computing chips like Google’s Willow, we’ve entered a phase of exponential growth in what AI can achieve. This begs the question: are we, in essence, building God?
AI models, by their nature, improve as they can process more data and perform more calculations. Willow, for instance, completed a task in under five minutes that would take the world’s most advanced supercomputers over 10 septillion years. Let that sink in. With this leap in processing power, we’re not just incrementally improving AI; we’re catapulting it into a realm where its capabilities grow faster than ever before.
This exponential growth means that AI will increasingly be able to tackle humanity’s biggest challenges at scale—medicine, economics, climate change, aerospace, and more. Think of the potential for AI to simulate drug interactions to cure diseases faster, or to model and stabilize global economies with precision. Quantum-powered simulations, previously bogged down by computational limits, will now be orders of magnitude more efficient and accurate.
Compounding this is the virtuous cycle of AI improvement. Enhanced simulation capabilities feed into better AI models, which in turn create better simulations. As AI becomes better at learning from its simulations, the pace of innovation accelerates. We’re entering a self-sustaining loop of technological advancement, and the implications are staggering.
But here’s where the philosophical question arises: as we push this progress further, are we unintentionally building something that resembles a god-like entity? A system that can solve humanity’s problems with omniscient efficiency? A machine intelligence that understands our world—and perhaps even us—better than we do?
Whether or not you view this as “building God,” it’s clear that we’re on the cusp of creating something far beyond what we currently comprehend. The question is: are we ready for what comes next?
Are these advancements leading us to a utopia where AI solves our biggest problems, or are we stepping into a realm of unknown consequences?"