83e81 - 2y
To me, it is remarkable that: 1) Almost everyone on the planet seems to be “using/training” AI to make themselves more efficient without realizing that the improvement comes at the expense of their long term income. And 2) While doing so, they advocate/reinforce a monetary/political system that pushes prices higher through manipulated money. And 3) They fail to see the consequences of those 2 diametrically opposed paths. Shows how many people only think in only first order effects. #Bitcoin #Nostr
17538 - 2y
👀
5f496 - 2y
AMEN!!!!!
Aaron Daniel @Aaron Daniel - 2y
Boothian Jihad. 🤖⚔️
c7c8f - 2y
I need to get my children to understand this deeply. Thank you for your work 🙏🏼🙌
Jeff Swann @Jeff Swann - 2y
Use AI to be more productive, avoid taxes, & stack bitcoin. Kill the current system rather than feed it. #agorism #[0]
1bb21 - 2y
I understand the 1st point but not the 2nd point. How does it lead to the 2nd point?
b5dbd - 2y
Everything that exists is a self-reinforcing loop. It has to be or it would fizzle out, and not exist. We live in a world of ghosts, endlessly craving, never satisfied. They won't change, Bitcoin will just exert itself as a forcing function.
98a38 - 2y
AI appears to be a jet pack to your own intelligence and creativity. The smartest and most creative people will get out say 10x more than typical folks. For example, no need to hire a big tech team anymore. The three top developers in the company can now do the work 10 used to do. No need to dilute that equity. For the top entrepreneurs, creators and designers, I expect they will see a massive boost in their long term income.
7560e - 2y
I’m not sure I follow? If fewer people are employed because of AI, economic demand will fall and the economy will shrink. The economy is not merely about economic supply, if AI boosts our ability to produce things but reduces the flow of capital to consumers then it will lead to a smaller economy. Because in order to transact, any seller needs a buyer. In a capitalist system, it is the consumer who is the engine of the economy. Frivolous consumption and high monetary velocity consumers are the foundation of a strong economy. Strip those consumers of their buying power and you quickly grind to a standstill. It doesn’t matter what you can supply. It doesn’t matter if your productivity balloons, you cannot economically produce more than your consumers can consume.
8aef7 - 2y
It does lead to the 2 point, they are opposite, that's what Jeff is saying. 1) technology like AI,makes everyone more productive, so it makes everything cheaper. 2) The current fiat system demand everything to go up in price. This two points are opposite to each other, the fiat system is not sustainable bc technology is deflationary not inflationary.
59cac - 2y
Agreed, but I’m having such a fun time with ChatGPT4 because it can understand what I’m saying so precisely. Open-source versions will be exciting, but I presume they will always lag behind until we hit Moore’s law for LLMs. Most people don’t understand the computer science behind attack vectors in distributed networks. It feels nice to finally have “someone” who understands again. Hard to resist that connection when most words fall on deaf ears. Humans want something they can use and tinker with, while AI wants to venture through your imagination with you — constructing the vision. I prefer the latter, but know it’s useless without the former.
7ca66 - 2y
People scrambling for lifeboats who don’t understand the predicament they’re in. Natural urge meets lack of education / critical thinking.
7c579 - 2y
Check out this Guitar Company's latest initiative. #[1]
Unlikely they see it at that point. More likely that they take to the streets to advocate for more manipulation of money to “save”them
🙏
I meant to say it *doesn't* lead to the second point.
AI being your only bouncing board doesn’t seem safe lol, but it’s a great pre-bouncing board.. helps nip bad ideas in the bud early on. I fed it my paper and it understood better than anyone on Twitter has — seems invaluable for open-source inventors.
697f1 - 2y
With the recent developments in LLMs it seems like your book was very timely. It’s happening very, very quickly, as you predicted it would.
Leo Fernevak @Leo Fernevak - 2y
I agree that people should converge on Bitcoin in order to have falling prices and counterbalance the inflation + manipulation, as well as providing property rights to all. Although I doubt point 1. Isn't it more likely that algorithms might steal our data against our will to use in its training? Personally I don't have a usecase for AI - yet. If I need tools I can generally write them myself and the human mind is more adapted toward creativity, plus, we can know that we have copyright to what we create when we don't use algorithms that use direct sampling data. I would feel terrible if something I generated via AI was created by someone else at a visible level.
Jeff, would love to hear your thoughts on the article. It's a very interesting take on the future and being ahead of the curve and balancing technology WITH human craftsmanship. What stands out to you?
Prices should fall as a result of the gains in productivity. They are only rising as a result of manipulation of money which is not the free market or capitalism. You’re measuring from within that system of manipulation. “GDP” should fall as prices fall to their marginal cost of production.
0899c - 2y
Jeff, while I agree with you, I get Stu’s argument from my friends all the time. How would an economy thrive with a deflationary currency? Their argument is that the economy would contract because everyone would hoard Bitcoins and stop spending. They would all just hoard bitcoins and not buy anything today because they would expect the prices to be lower tomorrow! And why would anyone invest in new businesses if the return on their investments only go down along with their products’ marginal costs? Being in the current system, I don’t have any convincing arguments against that!
Aleister @love - 2y
Yes, but ones purchasing power increases over time. People aren't going to stop eating, or buying items that they value/need/desire. As far as I'm concerned, this is the main inventive that turns humanity from mindless consumption and creates the incentive to take purchasing decisions more seriously. Economic activity may slow, but that which remains will be far more productive, add more value to humanity and reduce the entropy (waste) found in the current system.
79d43 - 2y
What’s your theory how we will solve the issue of many people losing the opportunity to work because of being replaced by technological advancement? The increase in purchasing power doesn’t solve this, does it?
Prices falling to their marginal cost of production does solve. Just hard to see from our existing system that dominates your view. You don’t pay for the air you breath - why not? Marginal cost of production is zero - except in space or underwater where marginal cost is higher to service that air. As jobs are replaced, prices fall naturally allowing people more for less which is the entire point of technological progress.
It is hard to understand, yes. How can the marginal cost of living become 0? There is always some sort of minimum energy required to produce something, even if everything is done by machines/AI. And if it’s not 0 how do the many people that have no jobs afford even the cheapest necessities. The only option I see is UBI. But where will that come from? What do I not understand/see that you do?
Let’s assume the money supply is fixed. If productivity rises then yes, prices should fall, if we also assume demand remains constant. If demand falls then prices might collapse and the additional productivity is worthless. If demand rises as productivity rises then price might stay constant. Assuming a fixed money supply, prices are a function of both demand and supply. If the money supply is not fixed, then prices are a function of demand, supply and money. In any monetary system demand is crucial in order to justify supply. If demand falls then there is no value to additional supply, whether that additional supply comes via productivity gains, cheaper resources or whatever.
Have you ever lived in a place that experienced generational unemployment driven by technology? Because this isn’t what happens.
d149c - 2y
Karl Marx went deep into this argument. He believed that technology would free laborers from the constraints of capital by enabling them greater productivity and consumption with less work. That didn’t turn out to be the case. Capitalists controlled the technology, so they pocketed the value difference created by it, and just had laborers working for less money. The people will only gain from the growth in productivity if those gains are not co-opted by our masters. The masters’ plan is to use the technology and make the workers obsolete and destitute. The jobless and poor are the easiest to control.
4e6aa - 2y
Someone had asked what's one of the things a #Bitcoin world will bring about that is most important to you: My answer is a serious reduction in the work week. As technology brings prices closer to cost, your cost of living goes way down, which means more time spent with family, friends, and hobbies. Will be an amazing world where everyone only has to work a few hours a week for the necessities and open up time for creativity and invention of things we can't even dream.
