Sam Altman envisions a future where universal basic income is a "slice of GPT"

midian182

Posts: 10,633   +141
Staff member
A hot potato: It's somewhat concerning that Sam Altman, the CEO of ChatGPT-maker OpenAI, is so concerned about the impact of artificial intelligence on the global jobs market that he's long campaigned for a universal basic income (UBI). But Altman now believes that UBI could be supplanted by what he calls universal basic compute.

Altman said that in 2016, he started realizing the effects that advanced AI could have on society, especially jobs, and conducted an experiment showing that UBI could negate some of these issues.

That program gave between $50 and $1,000 a month to more than 3,000 enrollees. Altman told the All-In podcast that the positive results would be released soon.

While Altman still believes in the benefits of UBI, he posited that a universal income program in the future could look very different from handing people money.

"2016 was a very long time ago," he told the podcast. "I wonder if the future looks something more like universal basic compute than universal basic income and everybody gets a slice of GPT-7's compute and they can use it, they can resell it, they can donate it to somebody to use for cancer research."

Altman never went into further detail about his universal basic compute idea, but it's hard to imagine that many people will welcome it, particularly if it's an alternative to receiving monthly cash payments.

Altman still offered support for traditional UBI programs, though he's not convinced that governments are doing a good job of implementing them.

"I'm not a super fan of how the government has handled most policies designed to help poor people, and I kind of believe that if you could just give people money, they would make good decisions, and the market would do its thing," he said.

Altman has long admitted that there could come a time when AI poses a range of threats to humanity, from mass job displacement, which we're already seeing, to extinction-level events. He said that a solution could come in the form of an international agency that oversees the most powerful systems – I.e., the potentially world-ending/changing ones – and ensures reasonable safety testing.

Another one of Altman's projects that is designed, at least partially, to offset the impact of generative/advanced AI is Worldcoin.

The Worldcoin crypto network features an iris-scanning identification system that uses Orbs to give people access to a digital currency. The company is giving $50 in crypto to everyone who signs up, which has made it especially popular in locations experiencing economic turmoil, such as Argentina.

The privacy concerns of Worldcoin have led to it being temporarily banned in Spain, France, and Portugal, while Kenya told it to stop operations. The company is also being investigated in nations where the Orbs are still found. It's likely that a universal basic compute scheme would face similar scrutiny, especially with OpenAI being the one controlling it.

Permalink to story:

 
"Altman fears the AI he created will lead to mass job losses"

He gets massively rich profiting out of Ai, and now he is "concern " that jobs will be destroyed because of him?

Im not sure that's taking his sleep away while laying down on his very extensive mattress.
 
Last edited:
Yet another in the very long line of "Tech Geniuses" that the world listens to who know much about their tech, but almost nothing about anything else. Yet the world still doesn't learn.

As Dirty Harry said, "Opinions are like a$$holes. Everyone's got one." Altman's opinions are Altman's opinions, and are not worth much, IMO.

As I see it, AI fits the definition of a FAD ATM. Wait until the dust settles, and we will see if the good that comes out of AI outweighs the bad that is also coming out of AI.
 
Seems like a whole new system to figure out, and with privacy concerns too. Maybe UBI is simpler after all.
IMO, everyone "marketing" their share of AI is nothing short of insanity. To me, this is what Altman is suggesting. As I see it, UBI would be far simpler, to say the least.
 
I am extremely skeptical about how well any UBI program would work out (I live near a community that decided to use its collectively owned business assets to fund a basic income program for their members ~15 years ago, and all sorts of social problems and crime have just gotten worse within said community), but Altman here is being extra ridiculous - it sounds like he just wants the government to pay for his company's operations, but with extra steps.
 
The only thing that keeps Sam Altman up at night are unrealized gains. This man has the moral backbone of overcooked spaghetti.
 
Great idea. Since AI will destroy laig as we know it, I'd say 90% of Basic Compute shares should be divided equally among every human on earth, with the remaining 10% held by our tech overlords.
 
"Altman fears the AI he created will lead to mass job losses"

He gets massively rich profiting out of Ai, and now he is "concern " that jobs will be destroyed because of him?

Im not sure that's taking his sleep away while laying down on his very extensive mattress.

Yep; take a step and think of what AI is capable of replacing in regards of human jobs.

- Accountanting

- News / Journalism

- Customer Service

- Finances

- Internet

- Self driving Ubers

... and so on.

Potential is huge - so is the damage possible by it.
 
Yeah, that has worked SO WELL with welfare and other government handouts. Not to
mention the free needles, free narcan, free drugs, free alcohol and what not.

"I kind of believe that if you could just give people money, they would make good decisions"
 
Great idea. Since AI will destroy laig as we know it, I'd say 90% of Basic Compute shares should be divided equally among every human on earth, with the remaining 10% held by our tech overlords.
Obviously I meant to type "life" not "laig" in my comment above. Tried to edit right away with no success. Now I can't because it has been over 15 minutes since it was posted. Very frustrating.
 
Yep; take a step and think of what AI is capable of replacing in regards of human jobs.

- Accountanting

- News / Journalism

- Customer Service

- Finances

- Internet

- Self driving Ubers

... and so on.

Potential is huge - so is the damage possible by it.

You forgot Porn Star.
 
He and the rich know that without jobs there won't be consumers, and without that there won't be economic activity. And without that, financial speculation is pointless.

Financial speculation, which leads to a lot of credit creation, is what ironically makes UBI doable.

The catch is that the energy and material resources used for goods and services are limited.
 
UBI doesn't work. If you make supply of something infinite, it become infinitely worthless. What part of basic economics do any of the loons pressing for this not get?

It's not supposed to be infinite. It supposed to guarantee a minimum income to be able to live off of. Roof over you hear, clothes on your back, food in your belly, basic education and health care. However you want to split up the costs (government runs it all and you get it for "free", or everyone gets cash in hand and pays for everything from private companies who have to compete with each other) the issue is how to we make sure that everyone gets a fair chance. Can it work? Who knows. But it is not about making unlimited amounts of money for everyone to use. Yeah, that would not work and would crash the economy.
 
It's not supposed to be infinite. It supposed to guarantee a minimum income to be able to live off of. Roof over you hear, clothes on your back, food in your belly, basic education and health care. However you want to split up the costs (government runs it all and you get it for "free", or everyone gets cash in hand and pays for everything from private companies who have to compete with each other) the issue is how to we make sure that everyone gets a fair chance. Can it work? Who knows. But it is not about making unlimited amounts of money for everyone to use. Yeah, that would not work and would crash the economy.
You have to produce something otherwise what you're doling out is effectively infinite. If you are producing "income" from nothing, then you are devaluing the currency and will just cause rampant inflation. You could rob all the richest people in the USA of their net worth and you still couldn't fund this pipe dream.

No one is owed a living. You produce goods and/or services and you get paid for those. Don't like what you're making or what you're doing? Show some initiative, exercise some ambition, and change your circumstances.
 
Oh thanks Sam, so you’re going to erode my earning capacity as a developer by making intelligence a commodity , but you’ll replace my loss by giving me time on the thing I don’t need that has replaced me , and I can resell that so that instead of doing what I spent my life learning to do, I’m just a reseller of your product, yeaaah, fan-fkin-tastic
 
You have to produce something otherwise what you're doling out is effectively infinite. If you are producing "income" from nothing, then you are devaluing the currency and will just cause rampant inflation. You could rob all the richest people in the USA of their net worth and you still couldn't fund this pipe dream.

No one is owed a living. You produce goods and/or services and you get paid for those. Don't like what you're making or what you're doing? Show some initiative, exercise some ambition, and change your circumstances.
This is based on the assumption that people stop working and being productive just because they are not threatened with poverty. The research done on the topic does not show any evidence of that. The "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" idealogy as a solution to inequality and poverty has, on the other hand, been debunked numerous times.

The idea of a UBI is also not about giving everyone a house, tv, car and yearly vacation. It would only keep people just above the poverty line. As with the permanent unemployment payments in many countries in the EU, this would mean that poor people would spend that money on things like food, clothing, housing and education. Rich people would not notice the extra (and pay it back in taxes anyway) and middle-income people would get a buffer in case everything in their life goes to **** due to an accident, disease, etc. I don't see anything wrong with that.
 
UBI is also a great weapon for authority, if you don't play by rules then you're fuc*ed
Depends on your social system in general. UBI does not eliminate the need for defending democracy, civil society and free speech. But it would leave more people the time and resources to spend on those important social topics and not just leave it to those who already have the time and resources, I.e. those who are already rich and powerful ;)
 
Back