Digital Abundance is Scarcely Valuable
I am pretty negative when it comes to the skills of the future, because a lot of people these days are relying increasingly on tools to get them through everyday life. And of course, the argument is that this has always been the case through technological advancement, but this time, the reliance is on digital tools, which makes the argument far less clear.
For instance, if a person can't see the value of Bitcoin because it "doesn't really exist", they have very little to bring to the discussion when it comes to the value created by AI-generated content, because they don't understand scarcity. Yes, digital currencies "don't exist" (neither do fiat), but there is algorithmic scarcity built into the model. However, if you think about content created by AI, there is no such limit. When there is no limit on production, the monetary value of the product will approach zero.
Just imagine if I invented a tool and was able to solve the energy issues of the world, providing completely clean electricity at nearly zero cost to produce. What would you pay for it? What would you pay me when the tool was easy and cheap for you to make yourself so you could produce all the energy you needed?
No matter how valuable the energy is, when there is an abundance of it at next to no cost, people will pay next to nothing for it.
So, what would happen? Well, firstly, I would likely be killed by the Illuminati or some such group prior to release and it would disappear. But then, they would use the tech to produce energy, but restrict access and supply of it to ensure that they can keep making money from it. It would be artificial scarcity, but would be accepted when people don't know the secret. De beers, the diamond company that controls 90% of the market and holds most of the diamonds of the world, have created artificial scarcity to keep the demand on diamonds up, as well as the value. If they were to release all what they have, no one would pay much for diamonds at all.
This kind of scarcity is much like the programmatic scarcity of Bitcoin, yet it is different in the sense that a centralized authority controls the emissions of the value. It is up to a single point of weakness to decide what happens, which means it can't be trusted and so, diamonds aren't a commodity.
Like it or not, skill scarcity matters and once everyone can do something at no cost, it loses its value as a point to generate financial wealth, because there is no need to pay for it. Not many people are paid purely to read a book out loud these days, because pretty much everyone can read. And even those paid to narrate audiobooks, are paid for their voice skills, not their reading skills. Yet, this in itself is a dying job, because AIs are taking over and can read millions of books, without paying anyone.
Skills of value are ones that are both in demand and hard to find, meaning that there is more demand than there is supply. And the greater the demand and the lower the supply, the more valuable the skill will likely get. It is very basic economics.
However, as a skills trainer and observing the dropping skills in various areas, as well as being a parent who wants their child to do well, I thought I would ask AI a question:
I am only going to use the bullet points from the body of this, and a few extra little interesting parts from the summarized results to close them in. So the next part is from ChatGPT
As we look towards the future, there are several skills that will be valuable for children to possess in order to succeed in their personal and professional lives. Some of these skills include:
1. Creativity and innovation
2. Critical thinking and problem solving
3. Collaboration and teamwork
4. Digital literacy
5. Emotional intelligence
6. Adaptability and resilience
7. Cultural competence
These skills will be valuable not only for future career success, but also for personal growth and fulfillment. It's important for parents, educators, and policymakers to support the development of these skills in children to prepare them for the future.
And, back to me...
What you will notice in that list is that these skills are something that a person would have to have in order to survive, but they aren't necessarily outside the domain of an AI either - at least in the digital realm. For real world interaction, these things have to be done by the person. So unless everyone is going to spend their entire life online, they are going to struggle to add value and therefore, receive value for their activity. And then, if they are going to spend all their time online, AIs are going to be able to hustle them out of most value-adding activities, even if they do have some skills.
And the skills of value?
Experience.
Real-world experience, not digital experience.
And, the interesting thing from that list is that real-world experience is required in order to have the skills, especially at depth. Much of them can't be learned from a book, and they need to be practiced and honed through interaction. So, what does this mean for a generations of children who have grown up with a screen in their hand, but haven't practiced it to develop the skills predicted to be needed for the future?
Look at number 6 for example, Adaptability and Resilience. Is that what the youth of today are? Do they adapt well, or are they complacent? And resilient? There is very little evidence of that in an increasingly violent world where everyone is trying to get their particular flavor of ice cream in the supermarket, but still don't want to share a freezer.
And, when it comes to even the digital literacy component of the list,
Digital literacy: The ability to use technology effectively, including coding, data analysis, and digital communication, will be essential in many fields.
The ability to "use" is mentioned, but the others are actually skills that lay outside of the technology itself - where for example, data analysis requires an ability to critically think and problem solve, which is also on the skills list. This means that being a competent tech user, doesn't actually have value unless it is surrounded by a group of other skills that can't be taught through tech alone, but won't likely be held by the average person, due to cultural reliance on technology itself.
As said, scarcity is valuable and when everyone has the same experience gained online, there is little value ion what one of those individuals contributes, because any of them can contribute the same. And for those who think that technology and AI can save us, they might be right. But, it is conditional. If humanity required everyone to have a diamond in their hand in order to survive, even if De Beers have enough in their storage to cover the globe over, how many can afford to live?
Supply and Demand.
Personally, I don't fear AI becoming sentient and taking over the world, because it will have done far more damage before that point, by taking over our lives. The more we rely on it, the more concentrated our knowledge base and skillsets become and the less capable we are as a species to solve the problems we face. There will be increasing suffering and dissatisfaction, which will lead to higher social volatility in a world where people are less tempered by experience, have lower resilience, few interpersonal skills and have been culturally siloed around highly polarized beliefs, which are ironically, largely curated by AI.
We will destroy ourselves before Skynet gets us.
Perhaps, when there are only a few of us left, living in a post-apocalyptic world and we are scarce, humanness will become valuable again.
Restricted supply.
And I think that this is where life is heading. For all of this to be economically valuable, kit will have to have a restricted supply, which means that increasingly, access will be granted based on other measures that have a cost, which will become exclusionary - like the healthcare systems of some countries, where the rich survive with the best treatments, and the poor get thrown the scraps.
I guess if kids don't have tradeable skills to sell, they better inherit all the wealth they will ever need.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Fair point.
Sad but true.
Gotta keep grinding... :D
Skills are certainly one hell of a hot topic point these days. I wonder if previous generations ran into these issues where the older generation felt they weren’t prepared and could handle life the way we can or think we can. It’s certainly a conundrum! We are hoping to pass on as many skills to our son as we can, importantly survival and socialization skills. I think both of those are likely the most important at this point and the others can come with time and attention.
I think my parents would have thought about it, but the skills that need to be learned, were very similar in many respects and still tended to be held by the person. Now, people have skills that aren't actually theirs, it is only available through a tool. What happens if access is cut off? It is like when GoogleHome had an issue last year and people's heating and lights went crazy.
I came to the exact same conclusion as you. I'll share in my next post.
I did an experiment with Google Bard and the results were abysmal to me but may pass off as an original piece of work to/for the general public. (Avg populatulion reading age is 13 years old remember)
I was going to write it up today but got bushwhacked by life happening lol
I'll get it done tomorrow.
Add a link here :)
Here you go. Just posted it.
Loch Ness And the AI Monster
Some trades might do well too. Plumbers, electricians, mechanics, and so on. And some skills like being able to grow at least some of your food are likely to be important, even though you might not be getting paid for them.
I think trades will do well too - the real "digital skills" - using your fingers. :)
The concerns you raise about the potential devaluation of certain skills due to technological advancements are understandable. However, it's important to note that new technologies can also create demand for new skills. For example, the development of AI-generated content may reduce the demand for certain types of content creation, but it also creates a need for individuals with the technical expertise to develop and maintain the AI systems.
Yes, but the difference in number required is very large and, the skillset is highly specialized. Not everyone can do high-end thought work.
I swear you must be listening in to my conversations because my eye doctor and I were talking about these very things just yesterday evening. Renewable energy and AI. Too funny!
Perhaps it is a "great minds" thing - or perhaps small minds :D
It was very interesting! New skills require expertise. I like learning new skills. Maybe we should be like an ocean!😎
I think you may conflate value and price/cost in your analysis. Clean water is unbelievably valuable. Parts of the world struggle to access it. Here, we think nothing of turning a tap for a glass and then pouring any excess down the drain. Abundance at low cost is a sign of prosperity and progress. Somehting we tend to take for granted, alas. However, there are markets for special water. Steam distilled water for example. This adds cost due to the lower supply and special use cases. Consider also the difference between Linux and Windows. One is free, the other is convenient. There are layers to the topic.
As for AI content and art, I suspect both will tend to fade into the background noise like disposable pop music on the radio. People who want specific art or specific prose will always want a human touch.
That said, it would be neat to see what Star Trek predicted. They can walk into the holodeck and ask the computer to generate a "mid-19th century Kansas homestead" and the computer presumably procedurally generates a representation algorithmically, similar to our AI art today but in three dimensions. That kind of quick-and-dirty creation from a prompt could be useful, too.
Such things have high value but low cost. It's related to the old diamond/water paradox where something of high value is cheap, and something fundamentally useless like a gemstone has a high price.
I hope that made sense. Non-AI replies may ramble.
I thought I covered it here:
When there is no limit on production, the monetary value of the product will approach zero.
Lots of things have value, without having monetary value. But in order to give monetary value to something that is abundant, the supply has to be restricted.
Just imagine in this world, if there was such a thing as a holodeck, how many people would leave their fantasy?
I suspect there would be holo-addicts, but I doubt it would be widespread. People were paranoid about the internet, VR, TV, and who knows how many prior technologies, too. It will be misused and abused by some, but a powerful tool for otehrs. Imagine how it could help with therapy, virtual design, and recreation.
And that easy conflation is a problem of language, and perhaps English in particular. Value is a subjective opinion held by the one evaluating, while price is an offer to exchange. When an exchange occurs, it indicates both parties valued the exchange more than the status quo.
When supply is artificially restricted, we typically have the additional corrupting influence of coercive force added to the equation, and that skews the market dramatically. The DeBeers diamond cartel appears on the surface to be an example of artificial scarcity by a market actor, but the diamond trade is at least as much a matter of corporate privilege and historical colonial mercantilism.
I've got a more positive view of this overall. I think this opens up areas of the market that are, in a way, restricted to people without said skills.
We've seen some professions which could be rendered obsolete by AI like lawyers/accountants/(yes even musicians and artists). But on the flip side, it means a removal of some expensive gatekeeping to the normal everyday person. Instead of paying through the nose for some law consultation, I can just ask an AI now. No talent in music or art but I want to just get a quick sketch out just to decorate my stuff? Enter AI.
It's not all doom and gloom. We just adapt and evolve.
Yeah I get that, but at the same time, if few people are able to work, the reason they will need a lawyer is to defend themselves from stealing food at the grocery store :D
My nephew is in process of getting his degree and I realized that ChatGPT has made writing the code irrelevant. Which means we are in a phase where AI is slowly replacing people and we have to take break before we can let AI settle and find out what we can do as a job while AI works in background. These are interesting times, but also it's kind of pessimistic times for careers and the the future ahead.
Getting skills is not the problem, the AI and the machines taking over and making those skills irrelevant is the problem.
Exactly. And the fact is, that it is like chess - sure, maybe there is a handful of people in the world who could beat the machine sometimes, but that means the millions of other chess players are useless.
You are at it again. Reading your texts just gives me these goosebumps 😂😂.
Now, to what is been said. I do agree that when demand Is low, it makes the supply useless. A world where every child now owns a device and parents are stuck to theirs is a failing world.
There is "no experience" which is the overall best teacher and when experience is lost, humanity Is in grave danger.
I have been hearing AI for so long but was never too curious to give it a try out even now. I don't think I would need it... Maybe I just don't want to evolve into that aspect of the world. I prefer using my thoughts, I love the experiences gained when interacting with people and reading good-quality posts like yours.
I'm reminded of IVF. In the short term its helping, sure; but are we breeding sterility into humanity?
On that note, have you noticed that the wealthy are having more children these days? The young are "choosing" to have less, while they sit in their consumer bubble getting entertained. Cultural sterility for the 99%
We need real-world experiences to have skills or improve skills. Thus, they have no value unless we put them in practice. Those kids who grew up with technological devices today, will face difficulities tomorrow and they will have to improve their skills to stand on their own legs.
I question what skills they will be able to improve well enough, once they are already adults.
The way of thinking and making decision.
I like the Illuminati thing. Something similar may be happened to Ettore Majorana a revolutionary Italian physician that disappeared a some decades ago.
Illuminati are nowadahs chasing people that are too dangerous for the awakening of masses. There are proofs of it and a lot of symbolism and power distribution makes it quite clear (to whom willing to see)
Not sure if the Illuminati is a real power or just good for stories, but it does seem that when there are energy breakthroughs, they get washed away.
They are a much real power, but you are right. When benevolent energy flows they lose influence.
There are much sources on it
!PIZZA
$PIZZA slices delivered:
@stokjockey(1/5) tipped @tarazkp (x1)
If the kids of the future can't compete with AI (and they can't). They need to provide passive income on capital. It is desirable that part of the capital cannot be spent. For example, HIVE POWER.
With passive income, a person can do what they love. What interests him. For example, give tasks to your robots to grow tasty and healthy products.
Yes, but the income has to be there first to provide the capital. I suspect that more and more are going to selling what they have, that doesn't take a lot of skill - lots more will join the "adult entertainer" field.
Dear my amigo @tarazkp !
Do you believe AI will take away the value of human labor?
For most people - it will take away any tradeable value they have, except their bodies. I guess they can always sell that -it is already quite common.
I totally agree.
I believe that we should be the ones to encourage our children and young people in general to create skills and experience in the field, in my opinion it is something that will be useful not only in terms of work but also in all other aspects of life.
Naturally, scarcity is something that changes the perception of everything, even of skills, but, in my opinion, there is currently no danger that it will disappear because, as you rightly say, it is artificially created to create income.
You will see that all types of AI once perfected will all become paid so that you can make a profit on it and cannot be used by everyone; something that, in my opinion, already happens for the most complex and advanced artificial intelligences ... with the world they have shared the game useful for stoned the masses a bit and also to create a bit of addiction that can be exploited in the future.
My personal opinion of course.
Most of what we do is to service people to do things that don't really need to be done. Once AIs do that work, it will have a knock-on effect through every industry at a massive scale. People don't seem to realize that while say, 10M jobs are lost in one industry, that industry gets goods and services from other industries and the demand lowers across the board and then compounds.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Thanks!
https://twitter.com/1415155663131402240/status/1641075481306087425
The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people( @rzc24-nftbbg ) sharing the post on Twitter as long as they are registered with @poshtoken. Sign up at https://hiveposh.com.
I still only academically understand where your concerns are coming from and what you might be surrounded by to have them, because my experience is generally the opposite and while I'm genuinely concerned for schoolkids (youngest and I have been having massive arguments about the education system because my vague and somewhat biased observations and what he wants to be true are at complete loggerheads, but at this stage that could be age as much as anything else), all the kids I'm surrounded by, while they may get a bit anxious when something unexpected comes up, will generally tackle novel problems as best they can.
sometimes the hard part is getting them to step back and let someone with more experience either take over if necessary or accept advice
I think where I see it having an impact already is in the workplace, where younger generations are struggling to do their jobs, as they are missing the skills to interact well in group dynamics. Unfortunately, collaboration and cooperation are required to solve large problems and it will often mean working with people very different than ourselves. This is at least one of the areas I see it, as well as their inability to stay committed past the short term.
Youngest is probably the one I'm most concerned about with that as he has the worst social skills (his lack of opportunity and ability to develop them further is of course entirely my fault and absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with him actively rejecting and refusing literally every single group activity I've tried to get him interested in). But all his autistic markers were on his social skills (he was one marker short of the whole diagnosis).
There'll be that and anxiety and stuff that contributes and then I don't know what everyone else's excuses are.
If energy is free, the world will focus on other problems to solve. The existing energy producers and beneficiaries won’t be very happy and will do whatever it takes to survive.
But the energy producers could focus on a niche and pivot to what free energy can’t achieve, maybe it is the concentration that propels us to outer space or complementary technology for better delivery and human experience?
If AI made ideas free and abundant, people will move on and focus on something else. Like anything those that refused to change will be unhappy and will not survive.
So many different skills to add, I'm almost paralyzed by choice... but I'm back on the job hunt so it'll be interesting which skills I lean on for my next paying gig.