0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
In any system, we can break down this capability into 3 main parts: input, process, and output.
Quote from: alancalverd on 22/04/2021 14:56:53"...and we should do it now" (Elon Musk) Why? Now is the only time when we can really make a change. Time is considered as a precious resource which should not be spent in vain. The longer we wait, the less time we can use to execute our plans, and the higher the risk of failure.
"...and we should do it now" (Elon Musk) Why?
These videos describe the alignment between base and mesa objectives, which are basically the same as terminal and instrumental goals, respectively.
On the other hand, our successors will be our mesa optimisers. We need to make sure that their mesa objective is aligned with our base objective.
In many cases, simply telling them that their behavior is aligned or not aligned with base objective is not enough to modify their behavior. It may be caused by existing mesa objective which can be shaped by evolutionary process, childhood indoctrination, or their previous experience.
David Sinclair, professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School, discusses his new book "Lifespan", which distills his cutting-edge research findings on the biological processes underpinning aging. Sinclair describes lifestyle hacks we can undertake now to combat aging, as well as future scientific breakthroughs that promise to slow down—and even reverse—the aging process.
Organisms who have developed expectation of future condition can get advantage from using happiness and sadness/suffering, which are expectation of future pleasure and pain, to realign their behavior with their objective.
Consciousness level of a system describes how much control it has to determine its own future.
The idea that I want to convey here is that money was invented from practical necessities. It's a tool to help improving our ability to manage resources, their production and consumption. It helps us passing through difficult times by shifting the burdens to easier times. In turn, it helps us improving our chance to survive. Those who don't participate in the monetary system won't enjoy its advantages, and put them in a bad position in the competition.Competition forced us to improve our system's effectiveness and efficiency. It lead us to invent more complex financial instruments.
Economic system, any of the ways in which humankind has arranged for its material provisioning. One would think that there would be a great variety of such systems, corresponding to the many cultural arrangements that have characterized human society. Surprisingly, that is not the case. Although a wide range of institutions and social customs have been associated with the economic activities of society, only a very small number of basic modes of provisioning can be discovered beneath this variety. Indeed, history has produced but three such kinds of economic systems: those based on the principle of tradition, those centrally planned and organized according to command, and the rather small number, historically speaking, in which the central organizing form is the market.The very paucity of fundamental modes of economic organization calls attention to a central aspect of the problem of economic “systems”—namely, that the objective to which all economic arrangements must be addressed has itself remained unchanged throughout human history. Simply stated, this unvarying objective is the coordination of the individual activities associated with provisioning—activities that range from providing subsistence foods in hunting and gathering societies to administrative or financial tasks in modern industrial systems. What may be called “the economic problem” is the orchestration of these activities into a coherent social whole—coherent in the sense of providing a social order with the goods or services it requires to ensure its own continuance and to fulfill its perceived historic mission.Social coordination can in turn be analyzed as two distinct tasks. The first of these is the production of the goods and services needed by the social order, a task that requires the mobilization of society’s resources, including its most valuable, human effort. Of nearly equal importance is the second task, the appropriate distribution of the product (see distribution theory). This distribution not only must provide for the continuance of a society’s labour supply (even slaves had to be fed) but also must accord with the prevailing values of different social orders, all of which favour some recipients of income over others—men over women, aristocrats over commoners, property owners over nonowners, or political party members over nonmembers. In standard textbook treatments, the economic problem of production and distribution is summarized by three questions that all economic systems must answer: what goods and services are to be produced, how goods and services are to be produced and distributed, and for whom the goods and services are to be produced and distributed.
All modes of accomplishing these basic tasks of production and distribution rely on social rewards or penalties of one kind or another. Tradition-based societies depend largely on communal expressions of approval or disapproval. Command systems utilize the open or veiled power of physical coercion or punishment, or the bestowal of wealth or prerogatives. The third mode—the market economy—also brings pressures and incentives to bear, but the stimuli of gain and loss are not usually within the control of any one person or group of persons. Instead, the incentives and pressures emerge from the “workings” of the system itself, and, on closer inspection, those workings turn out to be nothing other than the efforts of individuals to gain financial rewards by supplying the things that others are willing to pay for.
Companies that adopt robots hire more workersOn a macroeconomic level, the logic seems simple: If AI makes workers obsolete, then adopting it will make unemployment rise. At first sight, a study from France confirms that suspicion. The authors found that a 20 percent increase in robots in a given industry leads to a 1.6 percent decline in employment there. Of course, robots are a way more general term than AI, but we can assume AI would lead to similar results.The reality is different, though, when shifting perspective from the national economy to individual corporations. Somewhat counterintuitively, companies that adopt robots hire more workers. Admittedly, this data might be a bit misleading because companies with stronger growth can afford more robots sooner, which makes them scale even faster.There are, however, a couple of compelling reasons to believe that robots help companies expand their human workforce. The French study suggests that, if workers and robots share the workload, then the value added per worker goes up.For example, consider a company that employs five workers to manufacture a product worth $100. On average, every worker contributes $20 to the final product. After experiencing some growth, this company buys some robots and now only needs two workers per product because the robots are doing the rest. As a result, the remaining two workers contribute $50 each to the final product. Since this is a dramatic increase in efficiency, the company might expand its activities and hire additional workers, who can also now contribute $50 each thanks to the improved efficiency — compared to $20 in the pre-robot stage. This mechanism increases a company’s labor demand, so it might decide to hire more workers to expand its palette of products and services.
Any economic system is a meme. It will compete for its existence in the mind of conscious entities.Good economic systems are those that help their society to survive in various environmental conditions by distributing resources effectively and efficiently.
An economic system, or economic order,[1] is a system of production, resource allocation and distribution of goods and services within a society or a given geographic area. It includes the combination of the various institutions, agencies, entities, decision-making processes and patterns of consumption that comprise the economic structure of a given community.An economic system is a type of social system. The mode of production is a related concept.[2] All economic systems must confront and solve the three fundamental economic problems:What kinds and quantities of goods shall be produced.How goods shall be produced.How the output will be distributedWhen to produceThe study of economic systems includes how these various agencies and institutions are linked to one another, how information flows between them, and the social relations within the system (including property rights and the structure of management). The analysis of economic systems traditionally focused on the dichotomies and comparisons between market economies and planned economies and on the distinctions between capitalism and socialism.[4] Subsequently, the categorization of economic systems expanded to include other topics and models that do not conform to the traditional dichotomy.Today the dominant form of economic organization at the world level is based on market-oriented mixed economies.[5] An economic system can be considered a part of the social system and hierarchically equal to the law system, political system, cultural and so on. There is often a strong correlation between certain ideologies, political systems and certain economic systems (for example, consider the meanings of the term "communism"). Many economic systems overlap each other in various areas (for example, the term "mixed economy" can be argued to include elements from various systems). There are also various mutually exclusive hierarchical categorizations.
It's a term you've probably heard a lot. Late Stage Capitalism. People use it to describe the absurdities and wild inequalities of the world today. But what is it exactly, and are we really living in it? And if so, what comes next?
With AI and automation already displacing jobs in the United States, and the problem only expected to get worse, the idea of a Universal Basic Income is being touted as a solution to save us. But is it all it's cracked up to be?
Essentially, in capitalism, the burden of information processing to produce economic decision makings are distributed among economic participants, while in socialism, they are concentrated to the authorities/regulators. Both strategies have their own costs and benefits.