There's no point in AI making art for AI consumers.

no point != impossible

Sure, but it is something that AI isn't going to likely do.

Okay, so you don't think we're going to be turned into paper clips, got it.

ima head off from this convo, its rocket league time 😛

But I'm still not sure what this has to do with Artificial general intelligence, it would fixable enough to do any task a human can do for no ongoing cost.

Have fun.

ty

Let's quit talking about a mystical super strong AI that outpaces anything a human can do.

It's not mystical.

I'm saying by the time we reach that point, the conceptions of what a person is and what is doable will be radically different.

"Strong AI" right now is mostly good at a couple of tasks or learning straightforward new ones with lots of data.

I see so your argument is that it will be slow enough in development as to not be a problem?

One of my arguments.

No one has strong ai.

Correct.

Not in the "everything you can do the computer can do better"

General AI is not strong AI.

And FWIW, I'm not sure that will necessarily ever happen.

I didn't say better.

Per say.

Like everything I can do the robot will do way better.

But they will be better from an economic stand point.

But can it do all of them together better?

Integration is a fundamental and important task. It's also one that is too easily ignored.

Okay so we'll still have project managers?

But probably not even that, if we get a general intelligence, it should be able to integrate with it's self just fine.

And we'll still have park rangers, and we'll still have artists, and we'll still have government...

I disagree.

You have a hundred tools, you're saying just one more tool will necessarily make them all work together? And know what to build?

there's lots of weird rivets in these things.

Well when we have proff one way or the other we'll see, but the point remains that general AI doesn't have to be better than us as the job, just have to make more sense economically than us.

It's not just "I take API1 and then it gets along with API2"

I know what you mean.

1. that's mostly true
2. it's not that different when you think about it. How do you define "better"

Economically better.

More cost effective.

Then the statement "general AI doesn't have to be better...just make more sense economically" is somewhere between contradictory and tautological.

I'm saying there's other niches and things.

And people will be as much a part of the AI system as the software itself.

Yes but niches aren't going to supply employment for the nation.