No, he said that he doesn't like "creative types" and that they don't produce anything that he values. I was pointing out that they produce a wide range of things that we consume, often without thinking about it. It's also worth remembering that creative types have to pay rent and buy toilet paper just like everyone else.
What I was saying is that there is a culture around creative people today that is toxic. They have a "you can't sit with us" attitude. You have to have certain political views to be accepted by that community and they're always trying to push those "views" into their art. From movies to music to books. lets look at the new starwars movies. Episodes 1, 2 and 3(I liked 3) were considered bad because of bad writing. Episodes 7, 8 and 9 were bad because they couldn't let starwars be starwars, they had to push all their diversity initiatives and inclusivity into it. They had to change something already good to push a political agenda. Then, everyone in the creative community had a circle jerk where they talked about how great they were and everyone who didn't like them were bigots.
Yes, their (our) political agenda is to discourage bigotry and to accept people for who they are. That's been a very challenging topic for some people. When you say "creative" it sounds like you mean "liberal creative", right? Take Joe Rogan, for example. He's a creative, but he's also anti-vax, a science denier, and a racist. Frank Herbert was a creative.
Tired of feminism, diversity, inclusivity and gender identity. This is just socialism of 21st century. Those views are everywhere now. I left Netflix because I just couldn't stand anymore those socialist views in practically every new production. Waiting for this pest to be over someday soon.
The feminist movement is older than you are, and I don't think you understand socialism.
Thank you for bringing up vaccination! My father was a research scientist and was doing mRNA research in the 70s before all the Covid stuff happened. If you're vaxxed, his name is cited in the papers behind the jab in your arm. It infuriates me to no end that people don't want mRNA vaccines because they're "too new." They've been around for nearly 60 years, longer than the antidepressiants many of us are probably on.
That's not real socialism and we don't live in a real capitalist society anymore. Real capililism ended in the 70's when we moved away from the gold standard. The fall of the roman empire can be attributed to them reducing the amount of silver in the denarii. We have an economy built on debt. We can print as much money as we want and all that does is put the debt on latter generations. It's a generational ponzi scheme and after 50 years it's finally starting to fall apart. It's easily fixable but the american oligarchs who have amassed offensive amounts of wealth will never agree to that. We're very close to what happened in the late 1800's and early 1900's as far as wealth disparity goes. True capitalism ended sometime in the late 1990's and early 2000's.
What if the chatbots lose access to the Internet, will they still do the job faster, in time, all the time? You know, we humans can do all kids of things, from small sabotages to all-out civil war if they push as hard enough; and guess who's heads will be under the guillotine in the end?
Yes, it will. Facebook's chatbot source code got leaked. You can basically run a chatbot on your pc without the Internet, which means you can have this permanent worker running of your own pc without access to the Internet. I am sure you can feed it information too to learn from it as well. If not yet you will be eventually. Everyone will have their own personal AI eventually, on their phone that learns based on their interests, that's the way I see it.
Two years. Give it two years mate. 10 years ago most experts said we have 30 to 50 years to reach what chatGPT does right now. Imagin how much quicker this **** will improve if we are already at the place where most experts said it will take us 30 to 50 years to get to.
Keeping economic inneffiencies for the sake of keeping jobs is silly. "computer" use to be a job where people would do math by hand. I don't think modern farmers are arguing with hydraulics. The fact of the matter is that if your job can be easily replaced and automated then it should be. No one is entitled to a job.
"No one is entitled to a job". You must be an idealist, because the world is full of nepotism and lazy people "entitled" to their jobs. For example in the socialist, progressive and inclusive EU country (that starts with S) where I live and work, mediocrity is awarded and stupidity is tolerated and the chatbots won't take up many jobs any time soon, in the big corporations or factories with thousands of employees, because if they do, those jobless masses will burn down the cities, along with the politicians who let it happen. If there must be a change it has to happen slowly, not overnight because some greedy, old Corporate Commanders want a few more billions before they go meet their horned god.
I have some Old Speckled Hen, is that good?Oh.... This should be good. Anybody have any popcorn?
Sure, sure. Without access to the Internet you are all dead in the water, bots or humans.
I agree that nobody is "entitled" to a job but I do believe that private corporations should be heavily-regulated because, as we've seen, they're extremely prone to making decisions that damage the economy, the people and the planet.
Sure, give me some and I'll give you some popcorn, then we'll have both!
Well, fortunately for me, I'm Generation-X which means that I grew up without the internet and ubiquitous mobile phones so I'd probably be ok. A lot of people born post-2000, yeah, they'd be screwed.
I sure am. Just look at where we are. I have to assume that you're being sarcastic.
It's one thing to take away tedious jobs from people like calculating and manual labor by replacing it with mechanized stuff. It's entirely different when you start taking away jobs that are meaningful to people like programming, writing, and art of any kind. If people aren't working because they can't get a job due to AI doing everything better faster and forever without any complaints humanity is done. People NEED jobs to live. They may not be entitled to one but they absolutely need one and it will be impossible to compete with AIs eventually.
If AI can do everything better than maybe we have to reevaluate how our economy works
The economy has been broken for the entirety of human kind. The only time it remotely worked properly was between 1940 and 1970 and then it completely failed in 2008. I'm not calling for outright socialism but whatever this dumpster fire that we call capitalism is is not working. For human history we have relied on production based economies. If AI and automation can replace the human work force WE WILL have to think of how the economy works differently. I know I'm tired of living in this clown world. I got a significant raise this year but when adjusted for the cost of living I still make less than I did pre-covid.
100% this should happen. In theory with AI every person on Earth could live an amazing life. Just enjoy every second of it on this planet. Have meaningful experiences whatever they may be to each person. But people are greedy, especially the elites who are in charge of making these systems (board members, the people who are all about that profits the people who are funding all this)and I just don't see how this isn't going to be exploited to the max instead.
