Creativity also requires information. And Information is discovered. We can only generate random ideas from what we know. We can't imagine something we've never sensed, or know. You can't imagine a color you've never seen without recalling known colors. You can freely mix ideas due to your imagination.
But when we discover new information, we must decide whether the information is useful. Otherwise the information is considered noise.
We give weight to decisions: time spent pondering, considering, and the more weight we give, the better the decision. Almost always the idea is measured in usefulness.
There is always some form of social loafing going on in any large group of people doing work.
"The Ringelmann effect is the tendency for individual members of a group to become increasingly less productive as the size of their group increases."
There is evidence of this in simple tug of war games.
But I think there is also truth in realizing work is mostly performative: the pareto principle seems to apply. 20% of the workforce sustains the other 80%. That's purely anecdotal, I doubt the numbers align that way. But it does always seem there are a few all-stars carrying others.
You are right. I'm not saying I like the way things are trending. But I also think setting up our children means making sure they're prepared for the future. I don't think AI will ever replace the importance of education.
If you consider things like Mythos (I know it was partly hype), and cyber security using AI to find old vulnerabilities in open source tools, and others using that information to actively disrupt the economy (this is already happening)....
And governments pushing quantum computing, presumably to be first to crack Internet security: it's easier to imagine some of those future threats.
I agree with most of your points except the last one.
Probably easier to ask a question than argue a point:
How eager are you to use Government services?
Businesses are only well-run if they make profit: hiring the cheapest labor to produce something people will actually spend money on. And the more frictionless that process, the more our economy advances it. AI fits in there very well.
I also want to point out: startups are usually happy to be bought up by the bigger guys.
I doubt it. There is so little care for monopoly or copyright because AI is a race, as much as it is a tool. And nobody wants to restrict the race. Policy may pass that limits the use of AI for the general public, but the 'whatever it takes' race to 'superintelligence' goes on.
I think it's more of a prestige discussion. Who leads, who follows, between countries. Not whose super intelligence is better. Who got their first, and how are they using it?
The irony of the dotcom crash is that a lot of 'dark fiber' service started rolling out decades later. Fiber that was laid during the dotcom era.
There are lots of datacenters going up in similar fashion. I don't know if they'd have the same utility decades later (very unlikely), but it's interesting.
But when we discover new information, we must decide whether the information is useful. Otherwise the information is considered noise.
We give weight to decisions: time spent pondering, considering, and the more weight we give, the better the decision. Almost always the idea is measured in usefulness.
Sound familiar?