08-04-2018, 09:52 AM | #41 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
Re: Keeping humans relevant in the shadow of TL10 AI.
Economies only exist to exchange goods and services. A production line that produces widgets that no one consumes is going to go out of business when the bills come due. An entire automated society where robots stockpile goods that no one consumes is not an economy, as there is no exchange of goods and services, just a useless warehousing of stuff until outsiders steal everything from storage.
|
08-04-2018, 10:06 AM | #42 | |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Keeping humans relevant in the shadow of TL10 AI.
Quote:
Last edited by David Johnston2; 08-04-2018 at 10:39 AM. |
|
08-04-2018, 10:14 AM | #43 | |
Join Date: Mar 2014
|
Re: Keeping humans relevant in the shadow of TL10 AI.
Quote:
Adding a couple of people who do some trading with each other to such an automated society wouldn't cause it to collapse. |
|
08-04-2018, 11:33 AM | #44 | |
Join Date: Oct 2005
|
Re: Keeping humans relevant in the shadow of TL10 AI.
Quote:
If two people trade widgets and 10 million are produced annually, the excess removes material from the economy that could have been used elsewhere. What doesn't get produced because of the excess widgets getting produced causes problems, especially if demand (either want or need) for what isn't produced is high. Any economy is not just a minimum number of people wanting widgets but the total wants of the total population.
__________________
The World's Tallest Dwarf |
|
08-04-2018, 11:47 AM | #45 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Keeping humans relevant in the shadow of TL10 AI.
|
08-04-2018, 12:39 PM | #46 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
Re: Keeping humans relevant in the shadow of TL10 AI.
Generally, the non-rich outnumber the rich. In democratic nations, they will eventually vote to take the wealth from the rich if the rich do not share it, as seen in the New Deal. In non-democratic nations, they will rebel and take it by force, as seen in the Communist Revolutions. Either peacefully or violently, the rich will share with the non-rich, the only question is whether they will do so voluntarily and live or involuntarily and die.
|
08-04-2018, 12:44 PM | #47 |
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Meifumado
|
Re: Keeping humans relevant in the shadow of TL10 AI.
What happens when the rich use their AI killer robots to suppress the revolution?
__________________
Collaborative Settings: Cyberpunk: Duopoly Nation Space Opera: Behind the King's Eclipse And heaps of forum collabs, 30+ and counting! |
08-04-2018, 12:49 PM | #48 |
Join Date: Jul 2018
|
Re: Keeping humans relevant in the shadow of TL10 AI.
In discussions like this I think it's important to define the variables that are at stake, and reconcile the differences that likely exist. I've not really delved into detailed AI anything (due to lack of interest) but I've often seen the same sort of disagreements over how data is interpreted or extrapolated from to predict 'realistic' outcomes... much like with any sci fi 'realism' discussion. It's all in the assumptions and interpretations, and it seems no different than with AI. How you 'define' AI for the purposes of the discussion, the traits, the way tech is progressing/will progress, etc. I could go on.
When it comes to TLs, maybe it's better to treat it more as a 'suggestion' rather than as a 'demand'. Or rather, that things have to be that way, it simply reflects the potential limits for said development. Whether or not it actually reaches that potential can depend on other factors (including human ones like culture, politics, driving factors and motivation, etc.) Human factors have been a major driving influence in the way lots of techs develop, and it's not likely they will stop doing so anytime soon. And of course, treating it as a suggestion is consistent with how games in general operate generally... Also the fact that there is disagreement over those aformentioned variables (what is AI, how it's likely to develop or what is 'realistic' for such) itself creates plenty of wiggle room for keeping people relevant. Adopting a more conservative view of AI development as opposed to a optimsitic one would contribute to that outcome. Whether or not it is 'realistic' has yet to be determined but it has no relevance at this point in time either until the issue is resolved. It's the same argument I've often seen with laser weapons dominating space warfare (or in some extreme cases, completely destroying it for some people.) Last edited by Jack Sawyer; 08-04-2018 at 12:53 PM. |
08-04-2018, 12:53 PM | #49 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Keeping humans relevant in the shadow of TL10 AI.
|
08-04-2018, 12:59 PM | #50 | |
Join Date: May 2010
|
Re: Keeping humans relevant in the shadow of TL10 AI.
Quote:
Just to check if I'm reading your suggestion right, is that sAcc that's TL-12 or TL-11, as opposed to the currently-written TL-8 or TL-7? So the net change is a -4 to sAcc, plus another -4 in the fusing modifiers (proximity vs. direct hit)? That would certainly change things, especially for the high-speed strike tactic where the missiles come in at 10+ mps. In my example that would actually cut hit chance to ~60% (11 or less), say nothing of getting a ridiculously excessive number of hits for the PD gunner to knock down. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|