Readit NewsEdit: would this work?
Since it seems to accept an image, the question is what material would be best to run it on and then have it be scannable well on a standard flat bed scanner, which almost certainly will be available in some form as long as our current civilization survives.
That is why I used the word destructive instead of "having the tendency to destroy". All animals have that, but only we have actualized it. Hence we are destructive to a level that is unseen in other species.
Based on how the US currently rolls out universal programs, UBI probably looks a lot more like the current Section 8 housing program. They’re gonna guarantee something minimally livable, not beachfront property.
Let me be more clear: individual programmers are improving AI for its intellectual amusement, but organizations use it for its disruptive powers. Two different groups of people, with a bit of an intersection.
MOreover:
> Just to play devil's advocate, if there really were clear signs of this impending distruction, there could be some sort of international agreement to halt progress. Realistically, this will never happen.
Of course not, are you joking? There are clear signs of climate destruction as well with CO2 levels rising. Did international agreements work there? Nope, no flattening in the CO2 curve yet.
We are fundamentally destructive species, who cannot see long-term problems if there is short-term gain. The only mechanism we have on a global scale to decide what to do is capitalistic motivations.
Now it's a near fully-functional teammate that needs a bit of supervision -- still no one complained because it needs human team members to instruct it
Next it will be a full-functional teammate that is probably as good as a junior coder -- but no one will complain because senior coders will get paid more and companies will have to hire less
Then, there will be the expert AI coder, but still no one will complain because we will need system architects to design the system that the AI codes.
All along, no one will complain because those with jobs will still have them and those without will be too busy thinking about how to provide for their families. Get another job? Oh yeah, AI took that one too.
All along, we are incrementally improving AI because it is an intellectual amusement -- we simply never take into account the social consequences. This path of destruction is so blindingly obvious, it's incredible that everyone is still working on AI instead of trying to destroy it. But wait, I get it, those who jump on earliest still have a chance at a bit of profit....
...so it's all worth it in the end, right?
It's just the VC scheme: Over-promise/under-deliver = Profit
AI is and will continue to be a search on steroids.