Charles

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@robertskmiles Middle stump.

(It is a Cricket reference, in case not clear).

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@ArtemisConsort This is certainly a possible outcome.

To some, yes, this outcome may be preferable to extinction. To others, not.

Where do you land if the choice is between extinction and your scenario? Thanks

[A quick, minor, thing: here, "relatively good" is not the same as "good".]

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@kimmonismus Ah well.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@RufiEnLancha A Tennis session in sounds: first, the sound of a bag being unzipped, the sound of a can being opened, then the sounds of warmup hitting, then the sounds of hitting proper, with shoes squeaking in the background, and finally the sound of a bag being zipped.

Then, silence.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@HariomK61498 I once saw Roger train up close.

There was a shot I saw him hit that I am pretty sure broke multiple laws of Physics.

If I tried that shot, the only thing *I* would break would be my wrist.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@leanis1aw <bares his head> Quite so.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@tszzl Two of Chappelle's early specials are gems.

And, yeah, his comfort on stage is otherworldly! Was thus even when he was young.

Agree also that his standup now is distinct from standup-standup. It seems though he is *now* on a different ladder, thus hard to compare.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@beffjezos Hey Beff - @beffjezos - agree re the opportunity.

If not a bother, could you name three of the "fearmongerers (sic) with hatred for the West" that you have in mind?

Thanks

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@SamoBurja Agree, broadly, with your read of the power-room. AI is after all doing wonderful things for, among other things, GDP. So far.

That said, in what sense is AI unearned? Was the internet?

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@beffjezos I wonder if there is anything else tied to the 2nd law.

If not, perhaps someone can tie - literally tie - a large rock to the 2nd law and heave it into the Mariana Trench.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@DaveShapi Good Lord...

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@DataRepublican @MattWalshBlog If it helps any, the way things are going, the 1st firm to develop SI will not have it aligned to any human's preferences - not the CTO's, not the CEO's, not the Chairman's - cos they would not know *how* to.

So, no human, tyrannical or otherwise, will be in charge from then on.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@AndyMasley Hang on, do people look at, for example, Hinton and think he is being neurotic?

When I hear him talk on the topic, he is gloriously understated, and really quite calm.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@alexolegimas If labour is unaffected, it is a sign of sufficient demand for production, including that by the 'less-efficient but lower opportunity-cost' labour.

But if the more-efficient labour produces enough to meet demand, the 'less-efficient' labour would not be protected by RCA.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@alexolegimas hi Alex - @alexolegimas - I gather you are crediting RCA for lack of negative impact of AI on labour.

I don't quite follow your reasoning.

As in, RCA boosts total production, sure, but RCA does not assure demand for said production.

If labour is unaffected (continued)

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@tylercowen @ben_j_todd As you said: "...we cannot say for sure that the AI doom scenario is false. But is it a story we wish to live by?"

My response would be 'yes - please'.

And I have a query too: is the alternative story one we wish to *die* by?

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@tylercowen @ben_j_todd hi Tyler - @tylercowen - you worry about validity given the paucity of peer-reviewed work.

Is your worry higher or lower re the possibility that you are using the wrong heuristic here - here, where the cost of being wrong is not trivial?

As you said (continued)

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@MattGLilley This is well-put. Thanks.

It would be great if economists - all social scientists in fact - would strictly separate all their texts into 'normative' and 'epistemic/descriptive' sections, if indeed they aim to include the former.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@ChrisPacia @GeorgeSelgin Yes, as you say, "most of the time".

Then there the times when things don't go as expected - that is when one may give back all that one had gained, and a bit more.

Re the 4 points, let me back up and ask: are you talking about a free market? That was my premise.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@ChrisPacia @GeorgeSelgin In living memory, 2008 showed us what a few % of such an unwind would be like.

And, in a free market, we would get to see nearly 100% of it.

[Charles @CharlesC101010]

@ChrisPacia @GeorgeSelgin The more adventurous the transformation of maturities - and, note, we are talking about orgs that, at best, do not realise they are in an unwise equilibrium - the slighter the wobble that would unwind said transformations.

In living memory (continued)