On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why is the goal of "saving employers $70 trillion per year" through AGI an > important one?
Wouldn't you rather keep the money you have to pay your employees? > When employers spend money on payroll, or equipment, or suppliers, they > sustain the economy. > If $70 trillion is removed from circulation overnight, or over a decade, > that amount is removed > from the [global] economy. What are the implications? Over the last couple of centuries a lot of human labor has already been automated. The result has been economic growth, more career choices, and better working and living conditions without any massive unemployment. Ultimately our work will align with what we would like to do anyway. We will have an economy where machines produce everything we want, where raw materials, space, and energy are expensive but manufacturing and automated services are essentially free. But we have a long way to go to get there. It won't be overnight or even in a decade. I point this out to those who are foolish enough to believe that this is an easy problem, that they are going to solve AGI by themselves. I am sure I am boring people with my repetitiveness. -- -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
