Based on the statements from those in control, which at this point in our society are far more draconian and anti-humanitarian than any time in our recent past, the following is more likely.

If ai is able to be raised to a level that it can sustain production regardless of whether it can do anything more than holding pattern, human labor will inevitably become mostly unnecessary.

Due to how those in power think, the vast majority of humanity becomes valueless and unnecessary, even those few jobs left will also be devalued likely below subsistence levels.

Humanity will become a burdensome irritation that is irrelevant and unnecessary, the vast majority of people will loose access to most of what is left of society including technology and ai, let alone the ability to feed, cloth or house oneself.

You will become a criminal in your own house and life will become extraordinarily hard for nearly everyone the world over.

Most of what I wrote above is quoted from very famous very powerful insiders, who currently are building bunkers and personal supply chains.
Me thinks you don’t do that if whatever it is your planning is a good idea that will benefit society.

Now whether we end up with an automated world full of self building and repairing robots mining, refining, building and farming in my lifespan is a whole other discussion but that is the goal, an economy that doesn’t need people.

Unless we have some type of enlightenment where we actually have leadership who truly love and value humanity
and remove all of the bums out of power (including non-governmental) we likely aren’t going to have a good time here, at least not for very long.

Selfish doesn’t begin to describe many in the power sphere currently.

Jo22 wrote on Today, 10:48:

They maybe won't. Once they're there, AI/LLM development is many iterations further and has already outrun them. […]
Show full quote

For individuals in those companies, whatever field, i feel empathy and worry about what is means for all people if the stages of beginner to average ability are now all catered for by AI. how do they get to advanced stages?

They maybe won't. Once they're there, AI/LLM development is many iterations further and has already outrun them.

And the development is exponential rather than linear. 😟
People mention numbers such as 5 years, maybe because they look back and count how long development took in the years before.

But a danger is that AI/LLM optimizes itself in ever smaller time frames,
like a C compiler that can build itself/optimize itself each time.

But there's a catch, as well. AI/LLM is still improving by learning from original, human data sets.
But what happens if the human information pool is exhaused?

indeed. first i'm not sure present AI is an exponential growth in capability, when new tech emerges it often spends a while growing slowly, then grows explosively, then slows down in terms of capability (usually only growing again when other tech starts contributing to it)

in other words i'm sure LLMs from 5 years ago are much less impressive than now, but i'm not expecting the same leap forward in 5 years - more in capacity ; i.e faster, more pictures, longer videos, longer context retention etc rather than fundamentally "smarter"

but we will see. You're right too that training data risks - running out, consuming other llm outputs, reduced curation by humans as scale builds are all there too. think of an extreme - every media is generated, from that point on there is nothing truly new - just remixes for the past forever!

your point about websites is true too, several already noting less and less human traffic - what happens when they close? it locks the LLM into a fixed time again, with no new things (although i guess news outlets, and things that have updates and audiences will survive, but all smaller and edge case sites might not)

Jo22 wrote on Today, 12:05:

I sat down at a desk 5 days a week to code and pay my bills, it wasn't for the love it it, and based on my experience - all big corps I admit - that describes the majority of devs. I wasn't paid to produce unique and groundbreaking code, I needed to get my changes checked in by Thursday or I'd miss the release.

Understandable. But that's a flaw or bad attribute of the modern business world.
People just take dull jobs to get by, rather than finding purpose or fulfillment in it. That's neither progress nor healthy.

hmm, i'm sure its true of many roles in life well before modern business, well before civilisation, were also dull jobs as such. Perhaps they had more meaning because they were directly linked to their tribe, their community and that is the difference not whether its business, state or whatever. what badmojo was saying about the nature of "normal work" was right, and in fact a cooperative society cannot wait for artistry or creativity all the time, there's things to be shipped soon.

further, artists and speculative creatives can only exist in a society that creates a surplus. the people who depend upon and benefit the most from having a majority doing ordinary jobs are the people who don't do ordinary jobs

for your more optimistic ideas, i'm not sure 🙁 AI is presently owned by a few, i cannot imagine a smooth transition to the optimistic ideas you have even if it were finally to get there

(edited some spellings a few times!)

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-10-14, 00:51:

I don't normally get involved in AI debates but ..

Should we also not be worried about humans who have read and trained from books/literature/media ? Is this not the exact same thing ? or does it coming from a human give it a free pass? Training data is essentially no different than the books in a library, do you consider the people using the books to be stealing the information they learn from them ?

Humans don't (or shouldn't) get a free pass for IP theft and plagiarism.

The AI was created, trained and prompted by a human to do what it does, it only ever creates what its told to create, it has no free will of its own and thus all of its output is no different than the output of a hammer and anvil used by a blacksmith.

The blacksmith doesn't train the forge, hammer and anvil to copy others' work, nor does it just do it all automatically and go through an iterative and regurgitative process.

I personally see AI as nothing more than a tool, it requires a human to prompt it and use it for it to create anything, as for its training data ...no different than how humans learn from the collective Knowledge and Art we have stolen over the centuries from each other.

AI (of the machine learning kind) could be curing cancer and ending world hunger, and we aren't opposed to such a use. But where it's used the most is with LLMs to make useless crap, including YouTube videos purely for turnkey monetization channels. And it does it at such a huge scale it's impossible to clamp it all down.

(Just visit your local Art gallery to see the human created slop or Steam for the human created slop games there too, or just check out Netflix which is peddling slop like its going extinct)

Art for art's sake. Art as expression and political speech created solely by a person for the consumption of other people. Not a machine turning some prompts and images of others' art to be overfitted into slop.

In some ways we're in a platinum age of television entertainment thanks to Netflix, Amazon Video, Apple TV and the rest. And yes, there's also a metric crapton of junk out there, but there's something out there for everyone to enjoy.

AI is nothing more than a tool and I have seen some truly amazing things be created with it, I am not going to pan something simply because how how it came to exist, if its good and does what it was created to do then great Ill use it, I don't care if it was created by a human or generated with the help of AI.

I've seen some sparse few good things made with it, like the "There, I ruined it" videos where it's used to map his singing voice to the voice of another artist. The creative, imaginative part is all him, it's just the part where he sings an impression of Hank Williams or Johnny Cash and the AI transforms it the rest of the way, for the purpose of parody and satire. But then there are the countless godawful (and godawfully smug) political memes. Or the junk videos of tractor trailer accidents where suddenly the tractor part changes from a 1979 Kenworth Aerodyne to a 2001 Peterbilt 362, and all the people going "wow" about how incredible the collision was because they don't know better.

As for regulation . .fuck no, we have far to much already and it why the world is in the mess its in. There is far too much corporate and government oversight and I for one do not want more of it, I want less.

And I want clean water and safe motorways. I want buildings that don't collapse or catch fire because there was no oversight. I want lettuce that won't make me 'double dragon' for hours and potentially die. I want airplanes to not fall out of the sky or have midair collisions.

criminals do not care about regulations or laws and will do as they please regardless

Maybe you should stay out of AI debates, and maybe out of most other debates. The argument that "criminals will break laws anyway" is such a non-starter and is intellectually dishonest.

jmarsh wrote on Today, 07:04:

I guess you guys both missed the main point: that AI can't come up with anything truly new, it simply regurgitates. If that's all you think coding is then it's any wonder we're heading for the dark ages, where no new ideas will come about and the same "slop" is served up time and time again.

Correct, and I sense the common sentiment that AI is merely the latest link in the chain: original creative & critical thinking had already been in decline in [at least Western] culture for good number of years prior to AI making headlines, internetworked screens are literally everywhere with the addiction thereof actively turning people's minds to mush (do not think our enemies fail to appreciate this and exploit it to promote our decline), fewer are graduating with the essential means to be productive (let alone contributing citizens), and all the more we as a civilization would be rendered completely helpless if something happened that cut us off from the technological connections we have allowed ourselves to become so deeply reliant upon.

Pay attention to the game Mullet Madjack: it exudes a Tom Clancy caliber of speculation about where our society is headed if it stays this course for much longer.

badmojo wrote on Today, 11:45:

This "AI bad" discussion always describes a complete replacement of whatever it touches but that's just not how humanity works. Yes it's being pushed at us from all sides at the moment but it'll be adopted where it's useful and ignored where it's not. Drum machines could have replaced all drummers but there's still plenty of drum kits being used out there. eBikes could replace all push bikes but they haven't and won't because a lot of people like the exercise.

Exactly: replacement is the one aspect of AI I am NOT concerned about (the only job recorded to have been completely eliminated by automation is elevator operator, and it took many decades for systems to became reliable enough to achieve that). I happen to work in a clerical capacity in which day-in-and-day-out I am cleaning up the messes left by AI bots - even IF they were not so STUPID, it would still be necessary to have human eyes checking the results. While I can never see myself entering the IT realm, I remember how a few years ago there was an attempted en masse replacement initiative that since then proved not to have been so good a business decision.

Seeing how computers are still dumb no matter how "smart" they get is one of the [albeit more minor] reasons I eschew using AI personally, though I really have nothing against applying it professionally so long as its deliverables gets scrutinized accordingly.

kolderman wrote on Yesterday, 02:23:

Never been a better time to be a retro gamer

THIS! There is a lot of AI slop but there is a lot of human made slop. I find myself going back to retro games, retro machines and older movies. Everything today is slop Ai or human made.

ixfd64 wrote on Today, 02:29:

megatog615 wrote on 2026-10-14, 00:26:

AI code relies on stolen labor, just as how AI art does. People who are against AI art should advocate against AI code as well.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with this. I generally don't like AI art either because it diminishes human creativity and takes very little effort to make. AI-generated art is also often bland and emotionless.

However, AI-generated code is functional and not merely expressive. Using an AI agent to code can greatly increase productivity and help detect issues that humans may easily miss. So I don't feel the same way about AI-generated code as I do about graphics.

Goeoff on Craft computing channel on youtube did a review of an AI computer recently.
He is getting into AI as a way to make his otherwise useless server rack useful in a way other than playing games.

ANyway he did a review of a PC and set himself a task to use AI to help him fix a problem with a project he has going with a temp sensor he is working on.

The video is really REALLY worth watching, the results at the end are a real must see for everyone.
But dont skip to the end watch the whole thing to make the otherwise meaningless results make real sense.