CultureCitizen
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2023
- Messages
- 124
In other posts I've made quite clear my position regarding AI : it can be very useful but it can also disrupt how society works. It is very similar to a coin toss.
After long pondering about it I decided that just waiting for things to happen and yield a positive outcome was the wrong approach.
Instead of waiting and hoping the opposite approach seems to be the one that makes sense: each country should enlist its current problems plus the problems we already know that could happen when the AI singularity occurs and actively search for the solutions with the help of AI.
I had a brief "chat" with chat-gpt regarding this topic (simulating the opinions of 2 economic and one social expert). The three concurred.
This brought me some peace of mind.
These are the prompts I used in case anyone wants to try them with variations.
Prompt 1
During this session I will play the role of an interviewer. You will play the role of three experts: Expert 1 : An economist trained in the neoclassical model Expert 2 : An hetherodox economist trained in mmt and neokeynsianism. Expert 3 : A sociologist The discussion will orbit around artificial intelligence and its social impact. The answers of each expert should be concise.
Prompt 2
I understand that Artificial intelligence has the potential to solve some of the most taxing and urgent problems. As an analogy I would like to present the example of a person who is overweight, has high sugar, high cholesterol, high pressure, and muscle atrophy. He could wait for Artificial Intelligence to evolve eventually into something that could improve ( for example through food and exercise recommendations) or worsen (through targeted or biased publicity ) his current situation or he could actively engage to search for the tools that will help improve his condition. What is the best option? Can we apply the same criteria to society as a whole, that is, we should actively pursue the AI tools that will help us solve our current problems instead of waiting for the market to produce them?
After long pondering about it I decided that just waiting for things to happen and yield a positive outcome was the wrong approach.
Instead of waiting and hoping the opposite approach seems to be the one that makes sense: each country should enlist its current problems plus the problems we already know that could happen when the AI singularity occurs and actively search for the solutions with the help of AI.
I had a brief "chat" with chat-gpt regarding this topic (simulating the opinions of 2 economic and one social expert). The three concurred.
This brought me some peace of mind.
These are the prompts I used in case anyone wants to try them with variations.
Prompt 1
During this session I will play the role of an interviewer. You will play the role of three experts: Expert 1 : An economist trained in the neoclassical model Expert 2 : An hetherodox economist trained in mmt and neokeynsianism. Expert 3 : A sociologist The discussion will orbit around artificial intelligence and its social impact. The answers of each expert should be concise.
Prompt 2
I understand that Artificial intelligence has the potential to solve some of the most taxing and urgent problems. As an analogy I would like to present the example of a person who is overweight, has high sugar, high cholesterol, high pressure, and muscle atrophy. He could wait for Artificial Intelligence to evolve eventually into something that could improve ( for example through food and exercise recommendations) or worsen (through targeted or biased publicity ) his current situation or he could actively engage to search for the tools that will help improve his condition. What is the best option? Can we apply the same criteria to society as a whole, that is, we should actively pursue the AI tools that will help us solve our current problems instead of waiting for the market to produce them?
