[d4rkn0d3z]

It might be better to think about what a horse is to a human, mostly a horse is an energy slave. The history of humanity is a story about how many energy slaves are available to the average human.

In times past, the only people on earth who had their standard of living raised to a level that allowed them to cast there gaze upon the stars were the Kings and there courts, vassals, and noblemen. As time passed we have learned to make technologies that provide enough energy slaves to the common man that everyone lives a life that a king would have envied in times past.

So the question arises as to whether AI or the pursuit of AGI provides more or less energy slaves to the common man?

[myrmidon]

The big problem I see with AI is that it undermines redistribution mechanisms in a novel and dangerous way; despite industrialization, human labor was always needed to actually do anything with capital, and even people born in poverty could do work to get their share of the growing economical pie.

AI kinda breaks this; there is a real risk that human labor is going to become almost worthless this century, and this might mean that the common man ends up worse off despite nominal economic growth.

[nicbou]

Since AI is using my work without permission and capturing the value on behalf of tech companies, I feel like I am an energy slave to AI.

[zwnow]

The goal is to eradicate the common man. Turns out you dont need a lot of energy, food, water, space if there aren't 8 billion humans to supply. It's the tech billionaires dream, replacing humans with robotic servants. Corporations do not care about the common man.

[dominicrose]

Full robotic servants are very costly, only AI servants are cheap enough. But I do think we're going to see more wars and robotic use in wars.