You think. But there are ways around that. How about a credible extortion message targeting specifically you, that is embedded somewhere on the data sheet? Suddenly, the data has become the instructions...

Human-level AGI is by definition able to take away all human jobs.

> Secondly, we already know what happens when sectors face mass unemployment from the 1980s, when steel and coal workers were laid off en-masse: nobody came to help

There is a massive difference between 20-30% of people in a country being unemployed (historical sector-wide collapses), and 80-100% of people in a country being unemployed (human-level AGI unemployment). The second situation is completely historically unprecedented and will *not* lead to the same results.

> In a context where the state already has less tax revenue due to mass unemployment!

If human-level AGI is an actual reality, taxation (and money itself) is no longer relevant. Only energy and resources may still matter.

This could not be further from the truth.

Creating a new educated, competent human takes ~25 years, and significant costs and resources.

AGI can be just copy-pasted at essentially no cost. Even a robot that is mass-produced for tens of thousands of dollars is still much less expensive and takes much less time to make than a competent human.

Not exactly true. If AI goes from 0 to 100 quickly (human level AGI in a few years), we will all lose our jobs together and will have to confront this fact. There is no ignoring such massive societal elephant in the room.

If instead AI improves slowly, lots of people will lose their jobs, but majority will not. Those still with jobs may not be persuaded by the sizable jobless minority to support any societal changes, since they are still OK. This means the jobless will be screwed.

Well, the topic is about AI..

Is such a thing even possible with a generally intelligent system processing content with unlimited diversity?

>AI in general and LLM specifically so far

>smartphones in general and social media specifically

>maybe internet overall, maybe computers overall

I disagree that these are net negatives.

If.

They will also realize that industrial civilization enabled by gasoline was a necessary step towards the renewable energy utopia they are living in. Developing advanced technology takes a lot of energy.

It's not nonsense. If you think so, provide one great technology that has been a net negative.

Because consequential technology has many applications in diverse fields. And applications of technology are more often beneficial than harmful. So if the technology is broadly useful, in aggregate the beneficial applications will outweight the harmful ones.