Among other things, Phil’s literature review studies to what extent will human labor be a bottleneck for economic growth as AI substitutes for labor. I agree with you that AI-coding-AIs would have weird effects… but do you agree with the point that it won’t be enough to sustain growth, or are you thinking about other paths where certain bottlenecks might not really be a problem?
I think that humans would still be necessary for human society for a reasonable amount of time (months or more) if things go well. If things don’t go well, we’re toast, which is a pretty big deviation from the economic model. But even if things go well, I think the presence of things like superhuman persuasion lead to a breakdown of assumptions behind normal economic behavior in humans, even in that period where human labor is still a cost-effective input to the (now superhumanly-planned) economy.
Among other things, Phil’s literature review studies to what extent will human labor be a bottleneck for economic growth as AI substitutes for labor. I agree with you that AI-coding-AIs would have weird effects… but do you agree with the point that it won’t be enough to sustain growth, or are you thinking about other paths where certain bottlenecks might not really be a problem?
I think that humans would still be necessary for human society for a reasonable amount of time (months or more) if things go well. If things don’t go well, we’re toast, which is a pretty big deviation from the economic model. But even if things go well, I think the presence of things like superhuman persuasion lead to a breakdown of assumptions behind normal economic behavior in humans, even in that period where human labor is still a cost-effective input to the (now superhumanly-planned) economy.