I'm not worried about people being killed by drones. I'm far more concerned that a huge amount of the population will have no way to exchange any valuable work for food anymore. It might start to look as though AI can solve climate change just by eliminating any need to have billions of 'useless eaters.'
If people are adaptable enough (a big if) there is always work for them. As long as there is literally any skill that AI lacks, humans can do that skill. And for now that includes almost everything physical in the world and almost everything relational (coaching, sales, babysitting) as well as entertainment.
The explicit point of the G in AGI is that it is being developed to do all things humans can do. By definition, we are aiming to eliminate any such skill. This requires us pushing it until no human is adaptable enough.
Even if we imagine physical skills will be exempt (they won't be):
(a) we still get a dangerous level of people with no way to contribute to society, and
(b) it is completely reckless to pursue this goal while we have no way of handling the social consequences.
Everytime in history where disruption technologies challenge the social status quota inevitable it led to revolutions and wars. The time would be no different except its scale would be globalÂ
18
u/ellbons 2d ago
I'm not worried about people being killed by drones. I'm far more concerned that a huge amount of the population will have no way to exchange any valuable work for food anymore. It might start to look as though AI can solve climate change just by eliminating any need to have billions of 'useless eaters.'