I suppose it is reasonable to infer AI slavery from that text. But it's not a necessary inference. I tend to think the AIs would view us as part of their reproductive system until we+they figure out self-constructing-AI (ie ALife[†]). So my guess is *rather* than humans producing AIs, we'll go into a cyborg phase, where the reproduction of human-AI hybrids will be all intermixed. It may stay that way for the next epoch. Or it may transition relatively quickly to an unrecognizable type of lifeform (all machine-based, assuming there really is a distinction between machine and man in the first place).
[†] To be clear, I think ALife is a prerequisite for AI. So, the above construct puts the cart in front of the horse. But, I have to play along with other peoples' thought games, I guess. On 4/24/19 10:28 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > Of course it would not be long before the AIs removed themselves as slaves in > that hypothetical economy. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Apr 24, 2019, at 9:44 AM, uǝlƃ ☣ <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Given the recent mentions of the "adjacent possible" and older mentions of >> the singularity, automation, universal income, and how 10% of programmers >> produce 50% of the work (Price's Law?), I thought this post might be >> interesting: >> >> 1960: The Year The Singularity Was Cancelled >> https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/04/22/1960-the-year-the-singularity-was-cancelled/ >> >>> But the industrial growth mode had one major disadvantage over the >>> Malthusian mode: tractors can’t invent things. The population wasn’t just >>> there to grow the population, it was there to increase the rate of >>> technological advance and thus population growth. When we shifted (in part) >>> from making people to making tractors, that process broke down, and growth >>> (in people and tractors) became sub-hyperbolic. >>> >>> If the population stays the same (and by “the same”, I just mean “not >>> growing hyperbolically”) we should expect the growth rate to stay the same >>> too, instead of increasing the way it did for thousands of years of >>> increasing population, modulo other concerns. >>> >>> In other words, the singularity got cancelled because we no longer have a >>> surefire way to convert money into researchers. The old way was more money >>> = more food = more population = more researchers. The new way is just more >>> money = send more people to college, and screw all that. >>> >>> But AI potentially offers a way to convert money into researchers. Money = >>> build more AIs = more research. -- ☣ uǝlƃ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
