Should AI development be banned to protect jobs?

>people will suddenly do nothing and just be unemployed neets for the rest of their lives

This shit unironically should be forced in Africa and the west.

Attached: 1530931885102.png (1018x691, 285K)

>country A allows AI
>country B bans AI
>country A goes through economic shift but grows in economy
>country B does not go through economic shift but remains stagnant in economy
>in a conflict between country A and country B, country A wins every time
>country B ceases to exist
Mindblowing how y'all niggas see something on the scale of internal combustion engines coming and then decide the best course of action would be to ban it before people get mad from losing jobs and vote you out of office.
I'm actually impressed.
Actually are we sure that guy in OP's pic isn't a chinese agent here to sabotage American political will in AI development?

AI development will slow down eventually before it even reaches that level. When space travel was created everyone thought we would all be living on the moon and that never happened. Same with every other technology you can think of. Eventually everything reaches a point where no new progress is happening. People still walk even after cars were created.

Africa needs a no-child policy for 100 years.

Seize the means of production

By the time AI will have reach that point. We'll be on Universal Basic Income. Which will be sad, because then there is no way to prevent a society of lazy pieces of shit.

>Country allow millions of Jobs being autómated.
>Companies can now sell more stuff to unemployed people.
>Goverment can now make more money by having less working people it can tax.
>Small bussiness thrive because now people has no Jobs income.

but that includes you, jorge

>suddenly
no

Should machine production be banned to protect jobs? Should factories that use robots or machines be shut down so that only those with manual labour are allowed?

Get a job as an AI researcher or maintainer then.

>Should mathematics and algorithms be banned?
That is how fucking stupid that statement sounds.

Attached: 1527040650343.png (1600x1200, 1.8M)

>your county bans AI
>other country sees that and double down on AI research to get advantage
Already happened with climate change regulations. It's retarded af. Toddler-tier denial of reality. It's not even about "all progress is good" but rather "how do we harness this progress".

>should railroad building be banned to protect jobs?
that was real concern in 19th c.

Isn't that the guy who says we should embrace automation and move towards basic income?

based Yangposter
cant wait for UBI in 2021 bros

>and move towards basic income
it's essentially already a thing.

Yes but the ban must be enforced worldwide.

Unfair advantages cannot be tolerated.

And it has essentially already failed where it was tried.

it was not unconditional income where it was tried as far as I remember, was it norway? can't remember

Get fucking Henry Hazlitt'd nerds
fee.org/articles/the-curse-of-machinery/

Finland.

>people will no longer have to be working slave labor just to survive
>this is bad

Yes, in short term this will cause unrest because most people derive "meaning" from their work. And when they lose the only thing they ever knew in life, there's probably gonna be some people losing their shit. This is why we need to start focusing on educating people about things they can do with their life beyond being a mindless work drone. There are a shit load of things you can do, just most people have no fucking idea what's even out there, beyond what they did out of necessity to not be homeless.

majority of people have no creativity and can't do creative jobs.

also low IQ people can't be trained in things like STEM degrees.

Retard.

>Faux news
fake news

t. ruling class jew

Communist
News
Network

Dumb incel

AGI will either kill everybody or solve everything forever as far as humanity is concerned. There's no middle ground and no reason to worry about it. A ban on AGI research doesn't do you any good, the amount of resources required to create one goes down in line with the increasing availability of available computing power.

Development? No. Fuck these retards.
That will just slow down the inevitable development and is fucking dystopian. I would support laws which ban the use of automation in professions and require humans to do the jobs though. If only for the reason it's too easy to absolve oneself of liability through the use of a robot and this would help to preserve accountability over accidents in the workforce.

You're not born with creativity. It's a skill just like anything else. You don't have to be Van Gogh to make shit with your hands; furniture, jewelery, baking, restoring cars, learning an instrument, tailoring etc. Maybe instead of manufactured generic goods from chinks, people will actually want to buy hand crafted shit from people in their community. Maybe they'll spend more time with each other and actually build a community.

You don't have to be smart to do something useful for yourself or the people around you. People will find shit to do. Most people are "low IQ" and they are the ones that fix your toilet, your car, make your food and build your house. They can learn plenty of shit, just maybe not the things you think are important.

creativity is linked to genetics and is mostly caused by mental illness relatives.

>Goverment can now make more money by having less working people it can tax.
>taxing less people
>more money
how the fuck

how can goverment revenue increase if the middle class is killed?

ban jobs instead

No. But you should probably try and get away from capitalism since it will fuck you over once greater automation happens.
youtube.com/watch?v=4AF9aIgUj3Q
It's already starting to happen.

>Should AI development be banned to protect jobs?
No for on site/private property autonomous bots. Heavy overbearing regulations and penalties (or just ban) for things like self driving cars/drones in any public spaces. We (the us) should just stop importing people.

UBI is actually something that many economists are considering as a legit way of stimulating economy and preventing potential collapse.

The problem with Capitalism is that it's strength is also it's weakness. It's impossible to maintain constant growth, especially when most of the wealth is consolidating in the hands of the few, while the rest are stagnating and buying power decreasing. If your population is not spending their money, that's pretty bad for the economy. A public business that isn't showing consistent growth is gonna have a bad time. What happens when nobody can afford to buy anything? Big corporations are now making shit for practically free, and they do everything in their power to pay as little in taxes as possible. Trickle down economics is a fucking meme anyway but when everything is automated, expanding your operations to "create more jobs" is irrelevant, because you're not hiring anyone. So all the wealth remains in the hands of the few and never comes back into the economy. The only solution is a redistribution system. Whether you like it or not, there's not really an alternative.

>A public business that isn't showing consistent growth is gonna have a bad time.
Why? A stable income would be fine, the growth meme in business and government is stupid.

Because people like to make money and most businesses rely on investors, and if they aren't getting profits they will just pull their money and your business will likely collapse. It's partially the fault of the system but also human nature to always want more and hoard resources. There is no reason why multi billionaires and millionaires need more money, they do it because they can.

As for government, they don't really need growth, they just need money to circulate through the system. Business growth increases the amount of money available for infrastructure and quality of life for the people. At least in theory... In reality it's a corrupt shit show where everyone just wants to line their pockets at everyone else's expense.

Found the crypto techpriest.
Go light some incense and pray for your hardware to start working again toaster lover, the machine spirit will live eternal and dominate your deranged ideals.

Attached: 1544532109145.jpg (369x496, 27K)

>Should AI development be banned to protect jobs?

Of course, then just about every other country in the world can overtake you even FURTHER and make you irrelevant.

My first applied machine learning task after graduating made four old domain experts obsolete. Gomen.

Attached: 1522003051473.png (585x719, 223K)

The government has no legal right to regulate births. It would take a constitutional amendment to enact a one child policy in the US, and no one would support it.

It would be impractical for 195+ different countries to all enact the same economic regulation within their legislatures.

We could do it by eliminating tax incentives for having kids, and introducing tax penalties for having more than one or two. The new tax revenue will pay for abortions/voluntary sterilization for anyone who wants it.

>rouge state
are they like states that love to put on make-up?

programmers are the ones that should fear automation the most
Every time you use meta-programming, you're making a dev homeless

Do you guys really think Yang could win? I want him to, but the dem party seem to act like he doesn't exist. Not sure why though. He's a non white male with good ideas and he's not a threat to POC's. I've even met a lot of republicans that said he's a good candidate

Attached: 1448995921905.jpg (1440x2560, 1.23M)

who gives one? the DNC wont even let him breath, let alone get pres. Candidate. I don't care anyway, as Im voting for Chief Keef

what's his solution again?
just more taxes and give people free shit?
I'm extremely against that, people need real jobs to function, communities depended on welfare are degenerate and full of drug abuse.
prevent AI research? not realistic.

>tax penalties for having more than one or two
I would argue that if we needed to create a constitutional amendment to be able to tax income, we would also need a constitutional amendment to tax something which has no economic value.

That said, it would be far easier to convince the state legislatures to pass a constitutional amendment guaranteeing that the ability to give birth is a right which both cannot be infringed upon by the government, and cannot be taxed.

>implying replacing 8 million people won't just mean doing twice as much work with the same 8 million people

>overpopulation

Only a problem in third world hellholes.

Attached: FT_18.01.16_fertility.png (640x417, 25K)

>but the dem party seem to act like he doesn't exist. Not sure why though.
Because there's no money in it for them.

He does look like an interesting candidate and I'll vote for him regardless, but most people will take one look at him, assume he's tied to China and disregard him. People are dumb as fuck, hence why we have a literal, uneducated faggot for a president.

Attached: traitor.jpg (582x327, 24K)

Based Yang. Tells Israel to fuck off, will legalize weed and pardon those who have been charged with minor drug offences, focus on nuclear energy and actually tackling the problem of automation taking jobs. Yang 2020 all the way. Dude's a breath of fresh air and I love it.

Attached: 1551834723125.png (1016x763, 1.07M)

The same economists that proposed negative interest rates I presume?

>neo-fascist cells takeover of the West night of the long knives style
>West balkanizes into sub-cultural zones under the supervision of respective neo-fascist junta
>Ethnic Nationalism is enforced using haplogroup purity as a means of inclusion rather than ''''skin colour''''
>Cleanse, purge, kill etc
>Borders are now outward offensive zones where approaching is guaranteed death
>Forceful re-establishment of colonial sites for procurement of resources, cleanse purge and kill step also applies to majority of natives in these areas
>Go forward into a future where we could actually reach the stars

San Francisco tech companies are in no way comparable to most companies. Subway doesn't have to show this kind of profit, neither does Wal-Mart, Mitsubishi or Marlboro. Most companies are not relying on investors, but rather consumers.