AI could provide limitless capital and eliminate the need for humans to work. Humans could then spend however much time they wanted on "higher level" creative work. I doubt it will be leveraged in this way, but the potential is certainly there.
> AI could provide limitless capital and eliminate the need for humans to work. Humans could then spend however much time they wanted on "higher level" creative work. I doubt it will be leveraged in this way, but the potential is certainly there.
I doubt it too. Your first sentence is a fantasy for selling the technology.
If the technology really lives up to the hype, the "higher level" creative work will be done by a cadre of elite talent, the billionaires will directly operate their limitless capital, and the rest of the humans will be starved or eek out life as a billionaire's pet in some kind of reserve.
It's just as much of a fantasy as your dystopian scenario, because neither has happened yet. I'm also somewhat of a luddite and am not at all excited about LLMs or the new wave of "AI" that many others have been swept up by. I'm definitely not trying to "sell" anything.
You're also making the broad assumption that everyone engages in the process of creation, primarily for economic gain. In my encounters with other humans and my own experience, isn't really the case. We create because we enjoy the process of creation, not out of the desire to improve our financial standing.
Most of the work done in large corporations by individual contributors, isn't that creative in the first place. All of those CRUD apps are really pushing the boundaries of creativity!
> It's just as much of a fantasy as your dystopian scenario, because neither has happened yet. I'm also somewhat of a luddite and am not at all excited about LLMs or the new wave of "AI" that many others have been swept up by.
Not exactly. The dystopian scenario tracks more closely to the social impact of previous advances in automation, except, after those, capital still had mass-labor needs in other areas. That by no means guaranteed to continue, especially as the automation gets more capable and general. Versions of the utopian fantasy have been around for long time and never came even close to being realized (e.g. predictions we'd all be working 15 hour weeks in the 1940s).
> I'm definitely not trying to "sell" anything.
I didn't mean you did, I just pointed out that's the narrative that's pushed by people who are doing that.
> You're also making the broad assumption that everyone engages in the process of creation, primarily for economic gain. In my encounters with other humans and my own experience, isn't really the case. We create because we enjoy the process of creation, not out of the desire to improve our financial standing.
You're wrong there. You need a job to get money to eat and keep a roof over your head. Maybe you're lucky and get to "create" as you work that job, but you sure as hell aren't going to be doing that if you're hungry and living in a box under a bridge. Creating "because we enjoy the process of creation" is way up towards the top of the hierarchy of needs.
In our current social system, which shows not signs of changing, you won't get those lower needs met unless you're rich or can perform valuable labor for someone.
> Most of the work done in large corporations by individual contributors, isn't that creative in the first place. All of those CRUD apps are really pushing the boundaries of creativity!
Exactly my point. Dump all those people on the street. They're not needed to do that, and at some point they won't be needed to do anything.
