>”The technology isn’t moving in the direction you’re worried about though.”
It very clearly is, though.
>”And you are very focused on material things but those are generally commodities.”
So? How does the problem of automating the manufacture of commodities disappear just because it isn’t what you’re focused on?
>”I’m talking about the intellectual exercise of solving problems.”
How do you have an economy where every job is solving intellectual problems? Do we really need 10 billion humans doing that all the time?
>”A far more likely future is something that is a continuation of current trends.”
A continuation of the trends in the 1800s would not have been cars, it would have been faster horses.
>”AI will help humans perform certain tasks better.”
I understand that’s what you want, and what I want. But what business owners want is different. AI development will not proceed according to what little people think it should be used for, but according to what makes money for the people funding that development.
>”We’re already seeing that. We’re seeing costs of goods drop (or quality rise faster than price)…that has always been a feature of the current economic system and will likely continue.”
>”Total worked hours will probably continue to decrease as wealth and standard of living increase. That’s what the long-term trends look like. And miserable jobs will go away as we automate them.”
Really? That’s what long term trends look like? Shorter work days and less work days per week has been predicted for centuries. It never happens. Technology increases productivity but the workload stays the same, and wages stagnate. Why? Because the people in control of these things benefit from it.
>”The jobs I’m talking about aren’t focused on making widgets of some type.”
That doesn’t make the problem of those jobs being automated go away.
>”They’re focused on solving problems and creating unique solutions to problems we don’t yet know exist. AI will certainly aid the people doing this, but it can’t operate on its own.”
Why not? When, in your opinion, will AI suddenly stop improving forever? When has technology ever just suddenly ceased improving altogether?
>”The paper you linked to is just an optimization problem. That isn’t autonomous creativity.”
I say that it is. You and I disagree about what creativity means. In this case the robot was generating useful design information itself, without human engineers having to discover the utility of those changes. That creation of useful or novel information is what defines creativity.
>”Will parts of our market/government system change? Yes, that is built into the system. It has always been changing. That is a feature of the system.”
This much we can agree on. However you have some mental barriers when it comes to conceptualizing continued improvement of certain technologies that you, for some reason, imagine are fundamentally limited to their current set of capabilities.