they are immune. Society really needs to figure out how this will be handled.

since ChatGPT was released.

Part of the rush is a land grab: https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218315992

And part of it is a deliberate attempt to get AI used so widely, so quickly, that it will seem so necessary to commerce that attempts to regulate it will fail, and so will lawsuits over the vast theft of intellectual property that generative AI models have been trained on.

This has been happening since the 80’s with auto workers and even before with other machines.

People need to vote better.

how well the extremes will work out. From my own and colleagues' standpoints, I can't tell you how often clinical intuition makes a damned big difference--even if there is not confirmatory lab, scans, or other data to prove it. And especially on an emergent basis. That may also be the case in law, though again, it will be an adjunct assist.

I absolutely hope there are limits on it--particularly in informational uses, publishing, and journalism.

And, customer service is already so horrendous, it is horrible to think about it getting worse, but it might with an AI assist. That might be the straw that breaks the "public's" back.

since the eighties. It’s been a decent living doing work I enjoy. I’m a “creative”. My job is to come up with the right words to communicate a benefit. My job is being replaced by AI.

Nobody is safe.

She was not a happy person in most of her working life.

Gardening and early childhood development were her passions. She was certified at the master's level in both.

Neither aptitude ever paid as well as the "creative" schlock.

I grew up in a family where my parents were both artists with day jobs.

They achieved full time artist status when my dad retired with a good union pension.

Here's your healthy diet, here's your safe comfortable housing, here's your medical care.

You are encouraged to build whatever utopia you imagine from there.

Depaving the cities is going to be the most controversial thing we do.

And how to get people to be productive if they don't have to be

Does every person get it or just adults and then just adults with low income, and how low because lots would quit their jobs to meet to meet the requirement.

Don't think the math will work in a country of 332 million, 250 million are adults.

250 million X's even $30,000 is LOT of $ every year, like over 7 trillion dollars.

No income limits.

Last edited Mon Oct 2, 2023, 07:07 PM - Edit history (1)

People are happy to cheer UBI as the magic solution before trying to do any math.

Only 66 million adults are on social security, with an average yearly payment of $21,000, and we can't even come up with a way to pay for that.

250 million adults in the US would be eligible for UBI.

Just saying "taxing billionaires" isn't close to the amount of money needed.

There are only 8,000 million people on the planet.

Plus income tax rates pre-Reagan without loopholes. Everyone below $150K per year qualifies for $25K. Probably more math than I'm capable of...

32% of Americans earning at least $150,000 a year.
Of 250,000,000 adults, minus roughly the 83 million who make that much leaves us 167 million who would get $25,000, I think that's still 4.1 trillion dollars a year, some higher income tax and 15% import tax may not cut it.

Imports are around $3.4 trillion, 15% of that will be 566 billion I think, nowhere near the amount needed, raising taxes on the 32% by almost 3 trillion is not feasible.

...that proposed a version of a guaranteed basic income and tax rates from 1975 plus an import tax. The percentages and details adjusted to make it feasible. (What I suggested above was pulled out of my....) That politician would be as popular as FDR. The military budget adjusted for reality is a topic for another discussion.

..that even remotely attempts to address wealth inequality. It's only going to get worse.

That isn't likely to change.

Robots have been replacing humans for decades.

There's not many welders or painters on auto assembly lines anymore, for example. Replaced by robots in the 70s-90s.

I've got the skills and education.

It's not for everybody.

There were so many days I was just happy loading trucks.

are under rated.

The most difficult job I ever had was teaching science in an overcrowded severely underfunded big city public school.

That work was always in my head 24/7.

And how I met my wife.

When my wife was accepted to graduate school in a distant state (we'd met teaching) I eagerly followed her.

My lab and clerical skills, which I could usually leave at work, blessed relief, paid most of the bills, even with babies.

Last edited Sat Sep 30, 2023, 09:02 PM - Edit history (1)

this with post office twenty or more years ago. Not so much robots, but machines that sorted packages and mail. My husband was an electronic technician that worked on computers on these machines and maintained them. Many of his coworkers were always asking him to help them figure out a problem because they simply did not understand how to fix or didn’t want to learn. The majority of them were right wing maga idiots. Finally he had enough years of service and finally got fed up and retired.

Mib showed us how this works. Dijoy needs to be sent home.

MacDonald's needs a new store model franchise revision with no hiring humans, just kiosks and robo workers to cut down overhead, a couple cashier's, online orders, done.