Zealousideal_Ad3783
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jdp1je0 wrote
Reply to comment by canad1anbacon in Who do you think will be the winners and losers of the coming AI revolution? by tshirtguy2000
It's conceivable that a completely socialist healthcare system might be more efficient than our current quasi-socialist healthcare system. But both of those options are horrible compared to a completely privatized healthcare system. If we imagine a scale from 1 to 10, where a higher number means a greater abundance of affordable high-quality care, maybe our current healthcare system is a 1, a universal healthcare system is a 2, and a completely privatized healthcare system would be a 10.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jdo4hxg wrote
Reply to comment by SomeoneSomewhere1984 in Who do you think will be the winners and losers of the coming AI revolution? by tshirtguy2000
I don't understand why you keep asking me about the "real world". I know what the real world is like. I know that the healthcare system is insane, inflation is running rampant, people are being forced to work multiple jobs, etc. But all this bad stuff is happening because of government intervention into the free market. The reason I want us to move to a capitalist system is precisely BECAUSE I know the real world is bad right now. If I thought the real world was all rosy right now, I obviously wouldn't be a fan of capitalism because I would be fine with our current system of statism.
Regarding privatized healthcare: the big picture is that free-market capitalism creates an abundance of high-quality goods/services at a low price. If you want our society to have an abundance of healthcare available to poor people, you should support completely privatizing it.
It's hilarious that as an example of a "truly free market" you talk about illegal drugs. That's like saying "if you want to see how true circles work, look at squares!" Your example shows the problems caused by GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION into the free market. By making some drugs illegal, the government prevents legitimate businesses from selling them. So if someone wants to buy an illegal drug, instead of buying it from a reputable company with brand-name recognition and good track records for safety, they have to buy it from some shady guy in a dark alley. If CVS tried to sell marijuana (in a state where that's illegal) they would be stopped by the government. How the hell is that a free market? Your comment makes literally no sense. Look at what happened during alcohol prohibition in the 1920s. The mob got involved in alcohol and violence increased. Then, once prohibition ended, the government was no longer implicitly protecting the mob from competition from reputable business. So the mob was pushed out of that sector by market forces. Today it wouldn't make sense to go to some dark alley to buy alcohol, because you wouldn't be sure of its purity. So you go to a business that you trust, and you know that the product is pure. That's what would happen with drugs if the government stopped getting involved.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jdnt7kb wrote
Reply to comment by SomeoneSomewhere1984 in Who do you think will be the winners and losers of the coming AI revolution? by tshirtguy2000
I know what the real world is like. It's not great, which is why I want us to move to a capitalist system. And by capitalist system I mean, ideally no government at all, but at a bare minimum, at least completely privatize healthcare, education, banking, housing, money, etc. We are so so so far from that currently.
The government does not protect people, as you presume. The government is basically a giant mafia gang that systematically violates private property rights. It's a parasite that leeches off society. We would be enourmously wealthier right now if not for the government. Food insecurity, homelessness, dying from preventable diseases, these problems could have been eliminated already but so much of our increasing productivity is being syphoned away by the government.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jdnptb9 wrote
Reply to comment by SomeoneSomewhere1984 in Who do you think will be the winners and losers of the coming AI revolution? by tshirtguy2000
You can thank the Federal Reserve and all other government interventions into the free market for that. If we had actual capitalism right now, poverty probably would've been eliminated already.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jdnotfz wrote
Reply to comment by SomeoneSomewhere1984 in Who do you think will be the winners and losers of the coming AI revolution? by tshirtguy2000
Competition between the home builders will drive prices down. It doesn't matter if housing is essential. Food is essential, yet you aren't charged a million dollars for pizza.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jdnmid0 wrote
Reply to comment by SomeoneSomewhere1984 in Who do you think will be the winners and losers of the coming AI revolution? by tshirtguy2000
You're not understanding my point. People will be a lot LESS desperate for jobs in this world.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jdmylin wrote
Reply to comment by NoDimension1757 in Who do you think will be the winners and losers of the coming AI revolution? by tshirtguy2000
Stuff will become dramatically more affordable. One person's job will be able to support an entire family. Later on, one person's job will be able to support multiple households. And so on and so forth. So, fewer and fewer jobs will be needed in the first place. Remember, we don't want jobs, we want goods and services.
Also, UBI is a horrible idea.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jdmsomw wrote
Reply to comment by Alive_Promotion824 in Who do you think will be the winners and losers of the coming AI revolution? by tshirtguy2000
An abundance of extremely cheap goods and services disproportionately helps the poorest people. Jeff Bezos can already have whatever he wants, do whatever he wants, whenever he wants. So it won't be a dramatic difference for people who are already extraordinarily wealthy. On the other hand, the lives of the poorest people will be improved by like 1000x.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jdmqsp8 wrote
Reply to Who do you think will be the winners and losers of the coming AI revolution? by tshirtguy2000
I expect everyone (especially the poorest people in society) to be huge winners, except for the Marxists and Luddites who will have to deal with the painful realization that they were completely wrong about how the world works
Submitted by Zealousideal_Ad3783 t3_120yyik in singularity
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jd3q0rs wrote
Reply to comment by ThoughtSafe9928 in Bing chat’s new feature: turning text into images! by Marcus_111
GPT-4 only outputs text in both the publicly available version and the demo version
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jd3pqxj wrote
Reply to comment by ThoughtSafe9928 in Bing chat’s new feature: turning text into images! by Marcus_111
Uh, no, it only outputs text
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jd3n2sb wrote
Reply to comment by Marcus_111 in Bing chat’s new feature: turning text into images! by Marcus_111
I don’t think that’s true. What I’m talking about is having a whole back-and-forth conversation, in natural language, with Bing that allows you to perfect an image to your liking. The same way you’d be able to do it with a human graphic designer.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jd3g3sr wrote
Unfortunately when you ask it to adjust the images, it just does a whole new prompt (see the UMich example they showed). I’m looking forward to when we have a chatbot that can keep images exactly the same and just add the element you want.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jcpfo0b wrote
Reply to comment by just-a-dreamer- in Midjourney v5 is now beyond the uncanny valley effect, I can no longer tell it's fake by Ok_Sea_6214
The phrase “property owners coming together and providing mutual defense of shared interest” does not describe the state, it describes a private company, because it’s consensual. The state is the institution with a monopoly on violence, and by definition it’s not based on consent.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jcpasv5 wrote
Reply to comment by just-a-dreamer- in Midjourney v5 is now beyond the uncanny valley effect, I can no longer tell it's fake by Ok_Sea_6214
If private property rights are generally respected in a society, violent plunderers would be outcompeted by peaceful organizations. Public opinion would be against the criminal gang.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jcp7jfq wrote
Reply to comment by just-a-dreamer- in Midjourney v5 is now beyond the uncanny valley effect, I can no longer tell it's fake by Ok_Sea_6214
Defended by private security.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jcp67o9 wrote
Reply to comment by just-a-dreamer- in Midjourney v5 is now beyond the uncanny valley effect, I can no longer tell it's fake by Ok_Sea_6214
Capitalism is simply a web of voluntary trades. It’s the opposite of exploitative. The exploitative institution in our society is the government, which systematically violates private property rights.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jcp2gld wrote
Reply to comment by just-a-dreamer- in Midjourney v5 is now beyond the uncanny valley effect, I can no longer tell it's fake by Ok_Sea_6214
If you can’t make money as an artist, that’s society’s way of telling you that your artwork is not good enough to justify your labor being tied up doing that, so your labor should go towards producing things that consumers actually value. If capitalism was destroyed, those market signals would be lost.
Capitalism is about helping other people. It’s selfish to think that you’re entitled to earn a living — meaning other people are obligated to expend resources to support you — without actually doing stuff that other people value.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_j8vxt3p wrote
Reply to If 98% of people disappeared, would things tend towards greater freedom and progress? by kimjongun-69
No, the productive capacity of humanity would collapse and people would not have access to more resources. I guess an exception is houses and cars because they already exist. But they eventually wear down without human upkeep. I hope you see how your train of thought is extremely dangerous and scary. It’s not good to advocate mass murder.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_j8fvm7u wrote
Reply to comment by Superduperbals in Is society in shock right now? by Practical-Mix-4332
Your fourth paragraph does not at all follow from what you said in your third paragraph. I don’t understand how you could possibly say that the average person will have a progressively worse quality of life when a few sentences earlier you said people will be able to have a whole army of servants for essentially no cost.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_j283qwp wrote
Reply to comment by PretentiousCellarOar in How are we feeling about a possible UBI? by theshadowturtle
No
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_j27wcxa wrote
Reply to comment by AdorableBackground83 in How are we feeling about a possible UBI? by theshadowturtle
Ridiculous. Labor-saving devices are always beneficial and increase our standards of living. If your analysis leads to the conclusion that a massive increase in our productive capacity would turn the world into a hellhole, this defies common sense and you need to reevaluate your whole framework.
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_ix6nksl wrote
Reply to Metaculus community prediction for "Date Weakly General AI is Publicly Known" has dropped to Oct 26, 2027 by maxtility
Down by 15 years since April…
Zealousideal_Ad3783 t1_jdp2gdn wrote
Reply to comment by SomeoneSomewhere1984 in Who do you think will be the winners and losers of the coming AI revolution? by tshirtguy2000
My response will be short because I don't have enough time to continue writing a bunch of paragraphs.
If you think that only the government can make sure that food is safe, or that buildings are up to code, you just haven't thought about this enough. Of course the private sector can handle those things. Just because the government is currently doing something, that doesn't mean that only the government can do it. I bet if the restaurant industry was controlled by the government, and I was advocating for the government to abolish the Department of Restaurants, you'd think we would never have restaurants again because we need the government for that.
I'll let you have the last word because I don't want to continue this back-and-forth indefinitely.