Intelligence will be the most important political debate within 15 yearswhat do we do with the bottom 30%?
>>25123890Let them debate instead of intelligent people. Intellectuals need culled.
I think shutting down 4chan is a good start.
>>25124038sorry brown but you get shredded
>>25124054I'm white and you are a faggot who needs to injected with AIDS
>>25124057you can't even speak English
>>25124058Good. Terrible language.
>>25123890More like bottom 99%.No vote, no welfare, no more than 1 kid, force them to pay back any costs they have imposed on society. Don’t let them interact with anything for which they cannot handle the responsibility of doing to. Basically treat them like moderately intelligent beasts of burden being replaced with stocks of a better breed over time.
>>25123890We make them fight to the death in gladiatorial combat in ever more elaborate arenas, creating a massively popular televised spectacle sponsored by the ads of mega-corps. The top fighters are given the most beautiful white women to breed with to create the next generation of super soldiers: a permanent warrior caste bred for the sole purpose of defending the semitic brahmin overlords that the rest of mankind will exist to serve.
>>25123890It won't be - you will only have to be smart enough to ask the right prompts and maximize network capital. Lots of high IQs will spin there wheels and accomplish nothing - they will get trapped overfitting to various forms of noise.
>>25124091it absolutely will be, competency is the ultimate natural resource>you will only have to be smart enough to ask the right promptsthe bottom 30% does not clear this bar
I would argue a sort of genealogy for stupid people. What are their goals, their meaning, and their history?If history didn't value stupid people, they wouldn't exist, is my argument. This stems from the principle of sufficient reason.Therefore there is a purpose for this intellectual division. I would argue that humanity doesn't need intellect, as it relies primarily on myths to perpetuate itself and its institutions.You would need a revolution in the societal structure to value intellect. Which seems to me an impossible task.It seems to me this sort of intellectual chauvinism is thus nonsense. That is my conclusion.Argue better, and maybe the masses will listen.
lots of people exist and even thrive with low intelligence, now that intelligence is cheap, it doesn't matter anymore, what matters is what resources you currently have that can't be seized by the govt or the corporate mafia
>>25123890Once we start heavily using brain neurons to power ai it will genuinely be over for us
>>25123890That's not the important question.The important question is, what is the actual political calculus in a world where the basis for the social contract>(all men are created equal in their capacity for deadly violence (an 80lb autist can still cut prime-Hulk Hogans throat in his sleep), therefore, we should come to a series of increasingly complex understandings to avoid constant violence)has melted away in a world of kungu chinese robots?Even brutal dictators up until now have required consent or else face revolt, but if revolt is no longer a realistic threat, then what kind of world is to come?Never in human history has a regime been able to govern without having to worry about this. We are entering completely novel territory.
>>25124195You come to a thought experiment that lives rent free in my head.Truly when we argue against AI robots it will be our will versus theirs, a challenge we haven't seen in the modern age.I realize that the only counter is maths. The description you mention is the formation of a Nash Equilibrium, whereby the best solution is the one that works for all. Hence our increasingly developed society as we can commit violence.I would argue that humans would need to develop, perhaps proactively, a Nash Equilibrium against robotic AI. This is pure concept, and hasn't been explored more. Thus retaining the living privileges we all enjoy.I would argue that we would need a social contract where AI Robots are limited, fundamentally tied to human outputs. This proliferation of AI Robots is an existential threat otherwise.To tie the production of AI to human existence would thus solve this problem. How to do this effectively is another problem.
>>25123890its the most important debate today, and its not the bottom 30% that are the worry, but the bottom 99%
>>25123890What makes you so sure you aren't part of that bottom 30%?
>>25124222every conventional metric retard
>>25124246Proper spelling is a conventional metric of intelligence, one which your post does not display. Therefore, you are factually wrong on at least one occasion while being arrogant about it. The likelihood of you being a part of the bottom 30% has just increased.
>>25124248please point out the incorrect spelling in that post
>>25124214So like one robot for every person and the robot trains on the person's every behavior so they have to always be together because the robot eventually becomes the person's avatar after death?
the bottom 30% will be all of humanity
AI will become important, some say in 2028 it will become the most important topic of the election on whether to regulate it or not.
>>25124254The first letter of the first word in a sentence must always be capitalized in English.Every complete sentence must end with a punctuation mark.When addressing someone directly, one must use commas to set off the person's name or title from the rest of the sentence.Therefore, the correct spelling would be:>Every conventional metric, retard.
>>25124272>not knowing the difference between spelling and grammarthis is what we're dealing with folks
>>25124260You know there is a short story about this. I recall it is about people uploading themselves to a computer and eventually they replace themselves with the identical versions of themselves with the computer replacing the person. The person lives on infinitely but their physical presence is destroyed.The debate is over the will and consciousness of the person. This is the debate we are going to have, as Western Civilization recourses to defining what a person is in light of all these advances in technology.I would argue it is a form of death. You are destroying the only known nature of yourself, in trust of a greater construct. I appeal to Faust for this. I would like to write a story about Faust and how this relates to this great gamble that the West may take in pursuit of form.I would argue that you need to build game theory into the data. Game theory that argues for the person. We currently have that with our institutions, as we are the current truth-bearers. But as technology challenges our current capital that may vanish. That would be a sad reality indeed.
>>25124281No it was that stupid "gem" story by the Aussie nobody who used to get published in Omni.
>>25124280Though you may try to use tu quoque, the fact of you having made multiple mistakes remains.
>>25124342you embarrassed yourself and should just scuttle off to whatever ESL sewer you crawled out of
>>25124350You're the one incapable of using proper punctuation, however. You should really work on improving your own writing skills before acting so high-and-mighty.
>>25124214Personally I don’t put much stock in chasing GTO.I just think it’ll be interesting to see the slow erosion of all the bullshit in political philosophy which at its root is about keeping Joe Plubmber stamping widgets each day at the factory.The right sort of person could become an island unto themselves.But really to me I expect the humans to become fuse into a composite social organism of sorts, to become what the subconscious is to the human, with the AI performing the cortical work and the robots as the body. Humanity as the irrational and instinctual is, providing to set things in motion.
>>25124433Sry phone posting and too lazy to fix. I’ll have a robot do that for me too someday soon.
>>25124433Fascinating concept. Thanks for the share.And I am similarly skeptical of political philosophy. I have noticed it is scared to realize what it is really about: power. And so it naturally doesn't really talk about power at all, instead talking about rights and stuff. Because it is scared about it's own capability. At least that is what I think.
>>25124446Too bad 4chan already proved it wrong since the 4chan hivemind meme factory basically collapsed with the introduction of pervasive political dead internet chat bots.
>IntelligenceObsolete soon with AGI. Then the age of hyperlookism will be upon us.
>>251245194chan is doing comparatively quite well.The basic premise of using extreme and edgy humor/takes scares away most models and the lack of an uproot system leaves it still usable.Reddit is in comparison basically worthless at this point. A crowd system where the crowd isn’t actually real.
>>25124195posthumanism is the inevitable end game of modernitysocial contract theory is total bullshit btw
>>25124953you live in delusion
>>25124446sometimes morons here wear their illiteracy on their sleeves without knowing it.
>>25123890Trades. AI led learning. >inb4 llmds seething
>>25123890Food or sex, mostly sex
>>25125172>Tradestotal copeas young mid-high IQ workers are pushed out of white collar work they will colonise the tradesthat's the whole point, the IQ threshold is coming and will rise and rise and rise and rise
>>25124072What happens when your entire society is comprised of 150 iq übermenschen? Who's gonna be doing the plumbing? Or sweeping the streets? Or Or any of the hundreds of menial labour positions that need to be fille no matter what?
>>25125445AI won’t replace all technical work anyways
>>25124048
>intelligencecan be taught to others if you yourself are of sufficient intelligenceyour own failure to recognize this horizon does not make a flattering impression
