What happens when AI is a more effective parent/teacher than humans?
It's never away or preoccupied with work, never loses its temper or fights with the other parent, never too tired to play or engage with questions, the list goes on.
I'm not even suggesting heated robotic caregivers. Humans could still be employed to carry out its instructions in the real world, from hugs to diapers.
As dystopian as it sounds to us today, it's possible that such a system could consistently raise more well-adjusted adults while also being cheaper and freeing most adults from the burdens (as well as most joys) of parenthood.
In the future, AI may be so much better than humans that raising a child by hand is borderline illegal, except for a few religiously exempt groups.
I am with you. I just want to share that succeedsocially.com has a lot of straightforward advice in a clean, ad-free format. In particular it talks about social issues more likely to afflict HN readers ("I hate small talk" "nobody likes my niche interests" etc. <3) I've found it helpful personally, maybe someone here will too.
Men can develop deep friendships with each other as adults, it "just" takes enough mutual interest and flexibility to spend a lot of time together. That is much harder if your time is already spoken for my family, a partner, children, work, hobbies, etc. Think of all those sitcom friends who just show up at each others' houses and hang out.
Friendship is fundamentally when two people want to spend time talking with each other (without an ulterior motive like sex or commerce).
Sitcoms are not real life and never were. They are made up situations designed to make writing funny scenes easy. Sitcoms are not how people actually ever socialized or behaved.
That is the future for AGI under capitalism. (See "Her" 2013 movie.)
A different path is for sufficiently advanced technology to help humans connect with each other and strengthen those connections, like organizing playdates for children (of course subtly enough that it doesn't come off as infantilizing). I don't think that can coexist with the attention economy though.
Same question about why the US's navy marines fought in the deserts of Iraq and Afghanistan far from any beaches, rather than leaving the land warfare to the US army.
I met a mechanic working on a jet engine pulled from a fighter in the repair facility of a US aircraft carrier (his biceps were as thick as my legs); I asked him why he was wearing a Marine pattern camouflage uniform. He explained that he was a Marine just on loan to the Navy because they needed an additional jet mechanic on the ship.
He told me that unlike the Navy sailors he had his gear bag with him and was ready to be dropped ashore to engage in hostilities at a moments notice.
You're not the only one. Somehow games are worse than other forms of storytelling: netflix, tv, movies, reading. Maybe this always happens to the newest form of entertainment, maybe it's because unlike the other forms your playthrough won't be the same as my playthrough.
In the end all our learning, experience, and content consumption is wiped away. Only what we produce remains, and most of that remains only a little while longer. Still, that doesn't provoke a mass of memoirs from the majority of mankind, so it's okay to sit back, relax, and enjoy entertainment.
Good of you to offer concrete examples. I don't mean these as ad hominems since I don't know you, more as counter examples:
> I've shared the results of my IQ tests (145-160+)
I wonder if the part of the population with <100 IQs are similarly open with their results.
> I speed when conditions let that be safe.
Admitting to breaking the law is an excuse for higher insurance premiums and for the police to hassle you.
> I suffer depression
This is one of the few relatively "safe" mental health conditions to announce. Who's lining up to hire someone who's openly struggling with addiction or has psychopathy?
> I'm very honest and want that in my closest relationships
Let's say your partner gets served ads about how your single, attractive co-worker has been googling you late at night, how your location histories have significant overlap, and by clicking the ad they can find out more. Not everyone will get suspicious, but some people definitely will click.
~~~
It would be great if we could all be open like you say you are, but society isn't even close to ready for that. Any rapid transition (like wide-scale encryption breaks) would be traumatic on so many levels.
You have my gratitude for this comment. I don't take it as ad hominem at all but rather excellent challenges and realities that move the conversation forward. These are good examples of the privilege I mentioned and I appreciate them being raised.
I agree that there is a long way to go before pervasive feelings of safety will exist. You also seem right that the transition, if we choose it, will more positively be consensual and gradual. This conversation seems to be often spoken of with binary models. Further, the preference clusters are implied to be in opposition so I hoped to offer a counter to that in case it might have a positive effect over the long term.
It's never away or preoccupied with work, never loses its temper or fights with the other parent, never too tired to play or engage with questions, the list goes on.
I'm not even suggesting heated robotic caregivers. Humans could still be employed to carry out its instructions in the real world, from hugs to diapers.
As dystopian as it sounds to us today, it's possible that such a system could consistently raise more well-adjusted adults while also being cheaper and freeing most adults from the burdens (as well as most joys) of parenthood.
In the future, AI may be so much better than humans that raising a child by hand is borderline illegal, except for a few religiously exempt groups.