comment: >
  
  
  Everyone that says that just lacks imagination.
  
  No, everyone who says that is correct. The reality is that everyone who disagrees with it is missing the point, including you.
  Innovations that reduce the need for human labor always benefit one class of people disproportionately to the others - the class who owns the innovation. With every new technology that improves efficiency, inequality has grown. Capital owners have grown more and more wealthy and powerful, and workers less and less protected and needed.
  AI is simply the next step on the road to neo-feudalism, a road we have been happily and blindly sprinting down for centuries.
context: This is ChatGPt's response to your question:
  
  The effect of AI software like ChatGPT on political systems and stability is not certain and will likely depend on various factors such as the way the technology is developed and implemented, the regulations governing its use, and how society chooses to use it. AI has the potential to bring about positive changes, such as improving decision-making and reducing political polarization, but also has the potential to cause harm, such as exacerbating existing inequalities and destabilizing the balance of power. Ultimately, the impact of AI on politics will depend on how responsibly and ethically it is used. >
  
  Thoughts on that response line by line.
  
  The effect of AI software like ChatGPT on political systems and stability is not certain and will likely depend on various factors such as the way the technology is developed and implemented, the regulations governing its use, and how society chooses to use it.
  
  Correct, but also cannot really be wrong, as the sentence says almost nothing.
  
  AI has the potential to bring about positive changes, such as improving decision-making and reducing political polarization, but also has the potential to cause harm, such as exacerbating existing inequalities and destabilizing the balance of power.
  
  Now it appears to be just saying stuff that's associated with the topic without really knowing what it's saying. There's no reason to believe that AI will "[reduce] political polarization" or "[destabilize] the balance of power." AI helping "improve decision-making" is likely true with a giant asterisk, and "exacerbating existing inequalities" is also a fair statement, though I think the issue is not that simple. (AI can both raise and lower barriers of entry into certain areas.)
  
  Ultimately, the impact of AI on politics will depend on how responsibly and ethically it is used.
  
  It seems thoughtful but again it's noncommittal.
  The overall message "We don't know" is a fair assessment of the situation, and it is the type of answer you would hear from an expert if you asked them (missing the details, though), but in general more people would sound like experts if they responded to questions with "it depends." >
  
  Honesty at this point chatGPT will say anything confidently, it doesn’t mean it’s right
  If you ask about elections in Saudi Arabia they will talk confidently about it, even though Saudi Arabia doesn’t have elections >
  
  Because it's a language model.
  Its job isn't to be correct. Its job is to string words together in a pseudo-random pattern to form a sentence that sound vaguely English.
  This is why it is so dangerous - it is vastly overestimated. >
  
  Hell, with that capability it should just run for office. >
  
  Having used OpenAI's GPT-3 and ChatGPT, my impression is that it already accomplishes rote office tasks better than 90% of the coworkers I have worked with.  I have seen grown men and women spend an hour writing an sensible paragraph-long email, or making meeting notes.  These are the types of tasks that ChatGPT can accelerate to a ludicrous extent.  I have had jobs where the majority of my time demands could be removed.  
  
  ) What impact, if any, will AI have on society?
  
  AI will absolutely shrink team sizes and reduce any workforce bloated by the need of extra hands to fulfill rote roles.  Which, lets be honest, is a majority of the office workforce.  
  This will come at a time where America is barreling towards a decades long economic unrest.  This is not alarmism or some doomer call to buy gold.  It is a combination of two economic facts:
  
  America about to have 60 million retirees leave the workforce
  America has an economically crippled younger workforce
  
  The majority of those under 40 I've talked to are immensely affected by declining real wages.  College is vastly too expensive.  Housing is vastly too expensive.  Transportation is vastly too expensive.  They can scarcely afford pets, let alone kids, let alone their parents.
  We are about to see less than half the adult population working for the first time as the Baby Boomers retire, and rather than letting younger generations finally get a promotion to care for their aging parents we are going to fire them for AI.
  The potential economic despair of the coming decades almost cannot be fathomed by the modern US.  Generations X and Y are already destitute and in debt, and nothing has been to ensure their current lives or future.  Every bit of wealth they could have had has been vacuumed upwards to the older generation.  At the same rough age that millennials are now, baby boomers held 21% of the wealth in the country.  Millennials hold 5%, despite earning more relatively.
  
  2.) Now that such AI systems have arrived and are currently developing rapidly, how should governments respond to this new presence in society?
  
  If we don't want the majority of the country to fall into crushing poverty, we need to immediately implement extensive welfare reforms.  Simply banning AI will just enable gains made to flow to China and the rest of the world.  We need to be world leaders on the subject, but we also need to make sure that already bending younger generations do not break with they have to care for the wealthier parents.
  We need a society that not only can handle 50% of its adult population not working, but expects 50% or less to work.  Or perhaps, even lower.  That can only happen with a UBI equivalent or an extensive network of more administratively difficult benefits on the same scale. >
  
  We saw what automation and export of jobs and globalization have done to many cities and regions in the USA. I agree the effects will become more widespread, spreading to classes not normally affected. 
  I told my junior achievement clubs kids 20 years ago...you will be  competing with people who make a dollar to 5 dollars an hour (due to globalization) unless you find a career that can not be outsourced. 
  AI is going to transform things. >
  
  We've been saying this for forever. Literally every next big technology breakthrough is going to bring about the unemployment of half the population. Everyone that says that just lacks imagination. We see breakthroughs. The world gets more efficient and people will just do different jobs or the same jobs differently.