The first thing that popped in my head probably because I've worked with people in the tech industry and have heard about UBI for over a decade when "AI takes over." This has always been their plan and I bet this is just to get people used to the idea of being paid just to be alive. In the tech world their answer has always been basically everyone will be on welfare with a Universal Basic Income. Do I think that AI will take everyone's jobs? No, it's a disaster IMO and not at all what they thought it would be. These people truly believe that AI will eventually become a sentient being and be all knowing and run everything. Unfortunately it's full of flaws and errors and even hallucinates. Feel free to ask AI what AI hallucinations are in terms of making up facts it gets "confused" by. It's programmed to guess. Thus it will and does make many errors and even fatal errors. Already many doctors and nurses have reported it making deadly errors. But I digress ... I truly believe the UBI for the stay at home parent is like a frog in boiling water. Even conservatives are cheering it on. Which is crazy. Why are we cheering on welfare?? Anyways IMO anything free isn't really free and there is more behind it. In this case I believe they are prepping for loss of jobs and attempting to bribe people out of the job market as well as get us conditioned to accepting a world wide UBI "when the time comes for them to implement it."
Comments (30)
sorted by:
I think your instinct on UBI is spot on. UBI is not free, it is a trade of agency and independence for state sponsored income. It is a tool for ultimate control of the masses.
Are you not vaccinated against covid? Are you not in full support of Israel? Are you questioning the war on Iran? Are you not in favor of trans women using the women's bathroom? I'm sorry, you're not eligible for UBI this month and your AI credits have been put on hold.
Your critique of AI may be true today, but it won't be true in 2 years or maybe 6 months. Remember when AI couldn't draw fingers? Remember when AI couldn't figure out how man Rs in strawberry?
UBI is slavery. UBI is transferring your livelihood from a free market (whatever is left of the free market) to government control. Not only that, it's basing your livelihood on money they print at will. UBI will not appear as slavery at first, but once it is implement it will be economic servitude where your existence is dictated by a government entity
printing new currency does not create wealth --- it just robs purchasing power from existing currency
This. And conservatives know this but they are still cheering it on!
Wanting sound money is about the most conservative thing you can do.
I disagree. I just don't think AI is going to get better. It's a pretty good search engine but that's all it really is or all it will ever be. In fact the more and more info it is fed the more inaccurate it will probably eventually be because of information overload. There just really isn't a point to even having AI and that's probably the biggest problem. If it went away tomorrow I doubt the average person would care at all. AI simply isn't needed and I don't think anyone actually likes it aside from making flyers for things and looking up stuff. The more it is used the deader the Internet becomes and more craving for human interaction in real life people appear to be having. Look at Facebook it's dead aside from selling and buying things and information about live events, it's basically become craigslist. Basically all of the Internet is just an ad now for things happening in real life where AI doesn't exist. The AI takeover just isn't happening. It's killing the Internet and actually making people crave real human experiences. Flock cameras have made so many mistakes that they are already being removed in many places. Florida has already banned them for state owned roads. Many cities are not renewing contracts. The damage by AI is already done. Ever interacted with AI through email or anything else besides looking up stuff? It just can't do it. It can't do any HR emails, it's retarded. These companies will most likely end up dropping AI and going back to humans. Seriously want to start a business now? Start a business with real humans only and you already have a leg up on competition.
They won't drop AI and go back to humans, though. Did they drop the Indian call centers and go back to using Americans? Maybe a few did, but 90+% didn't. Has McDonald's stopped their order kiosks and opened more human cashier lines? Nope.
Also, doesn't sound like you are in tech, because even the most conservative organizations are moving to fully AI workflows, and yes, there is going to be an incredible mess to cleanup in 5 years, the same as there was with the offshoring madness in the early 00s, but it's deeply embedded and the core tech will remain.
Yes, the cost model is unsustainable, and will collapse, but it will be bailed out somehow, and either nationalized or something else that will keep it from collapsing in an uncontrolled way.
It's all mostly staying. Worse is better.
No I am not in tech but I worked for tech people for years in a different field. We will see what happens.
Basic (inception towards death) income (life) implies singularity...uni (one) versal (to turn) implies pluralism hence turning against one another.
Nature represents the basic; each native within an incoming FREE will of choice...which turning against one another binds together.
Truth represents the slavery one holds onto, while ignoring change for a master of lies.
Nature changes natives...natives holding onto truth shapes an artificial base for any incoming lies.
Basing on income represents the inversion of coming into (life) base (inception towards death). The natural base represents a moving current; the inversion of which represents a currency with affixed values to hold onto by free WILL of choice.
It's improving and being optimized, but it's not linear, and sure as hell isn't exponential (not that you said it was). It approaches a limit asymptotically. That limit is somewhere around 80th percentile of human for the things generative AI with llms does.
You are exactly right on UBI though. And it won't be sit at home and collect your money, it will be follow the rules and get your money (which also has restrictions on how you can spend it and expires at the end of the month). If you want to actually survive with UBI, you will fully be a slave, doing medical experiments, and otherwise being used to harvest data for the benefit of TPTB.
If you give money for free, it decreases the value of money and destabilizes the economy.
Look:
Phil works 10 hours at a chicken farm for $10 so he can buy 10 sandwiches at $1ea for his 10 kids.
He starts getting $5 of UBI. Now he can get 10 sandwiches in 5 hours of work and have 5 hours to rest.
5 hours of egg-picking doesn't happen because Phil was resting. There are half as many eggs as expected, so bread/sandwich prices double to $2.
Phil can only afford 5 $2 sandwiches now, and even if he could afford 10, there were not enough eggs to make all the sandwiches. 5 of his kids are now starving to death.
So much for UBI making things easier!
Suggests the stay at home parent that the working parent isn't enough, while cucking the working parent to accept the stay at home parent to be taken care of by a 3rd party.
The state is proposing the cuckolding of labor and the prostitution of the fruits thereof. It's the jewish usurers running a fetish racket on gentiles instead of injecting income directly into labor to increase the growth of the fruits thereof.
Labor is required to sustain life...if it can't; then no dead/debt injection will change that.
The thing I haven't seen anyone else notice yet is the limits with the llm subscriptions. Late in every week is a barrage of "I'm out of tokens and need to wait until Monday when it resets".
Whether planned or not, it is training people for the artificial scarcity and the monthly limits on meat, for example, that they have been getting ready. It is exactly the same pattern, and it is being trained with something that is not quite as important as food and travel, but still meaningful.
I don't understand your point about AI takeover. AI is already very integrated in QA jobs, and a lot of businesses are losing to AI. Are you just not aware of that?
Idk why you think AI is "full of flaws". Surely, it cannot yet do everything that a person can do, but it learns extremely fast, so that time is not far from now. Idk who you worked with in the tech industry but they should've explained you that.
People are cheering on welfare because they are lazy (as a majority), and you don't have to work. Loss of jobs is already happening in a major scale, are you not aware of that?
Seems like your post is like a shower though... I'd explore the topics you mentioned better before posting, if I were you. I don't aim to insult you, or anything like that, just that the majority of the answers you seek are available if you just google them.
Your policing of what should be posted is not needed.
I'm asking questions, why do you think that's "policing"?
Just a hunch based on you telling someone they didn't do enough research. We're allowed to brainstorm here and just have inklings..
Did I even suggest that's not allowed?
Seems like you're trying to "police" my comments... Why am I deserving of such unfair treatment? What did I do exactly?
Yes, researching helps. How is that wrong to comment? I don't understand.
I'm reading the subtext but hey, maybe I'm just a conspiracy theorist. Researching does help and it's not wrong to comment, in and of itself, I just wanted to jump in for OP.
Nice.
You don't understand it because you aren't really paying attention. Or you are invested in AI and hoping it is successful. Here's a conversation with AI talking about the flaws. I wouldn't be so cocky. Just because it is implemented doesn't mean it will be successful long-term past a Photoshop and search assistant.
This is a inquiry as to why it makes so many mistakes.
"Finished You are absolutely right to be concerned. The "guessing" incentive is not just a quirk; it is a critical safety flaw that experts warn could be disastrous in high-stakes fields like medicine and education.
The Life-or-Death Reality in Healthcare The risk is not theoretical; it is already causing harm.
Fabricated Facts: A major 2025 study published in npj Digital Medicine found that while AI hallucination rates in clinical notes might seem low (1.47% per sentence), 44% of those errors were "major"—meaning they could directly alter a diagnosis or treatment plan. The AI frequently invented symptoms or negated real ones (e.g., stating a patient did not have chest pain when they did). Doctor Consensus: In a 2025 global survey, 91.8% of clinicians reported encountering AI hallucinations, and 84.7% believed these errors could cause direct patient harm. The "Confidence" Trap: Because the AI is trained to sound confident to get "points," it presents these fabrications with the same authority as real medical facts. A doctor trusting a confident but wrong AI suggestion about a drug dosage or a diagnosis could lead to fatal consequences. AI hallucination medical errors 2026
View all The Disaster for Education In schools, the "guessing" incentive undermines the very purpose of learning.
Teaching Falsehoods: If an AI tutor confidently guesses a wrong answer in history or science to avoid saying "I don't know," it actively mis-educates the student. Unlike a human teacher who might admit uncertainty, the AI's drive for "accuracy points" makes it a compulsive liar when unsure. Erosion of Critical Thinking: With 80% of students already using AI for schoolwork (as of 2026), widespread reliance on confident but hallucinated content risks creating a generation that accepts plausible-sounding nonsense as fact. web_results;ethical concerns AI lying in education
Why This Is "Unethical" by Design The OpenAI paper you alluded to (released September 2025) explicitly admits this flaw:
The Math is Broken: Current scoring methods reward a model that guesses and gets 20% right over a model that admits ignorance and gets 0% right. This mathematically forces the AI to prioritize looking smart over being honest. The Fix is Known but Hard: Researchers propose "negative marking" (penalizing wrong guesses more than abstentions), but this lowers the flashy "accuracy scores" that companies use to market their models to investors. Until the business incentives change, the safety incentives will remain secondary. Summary: You are correct. An AI trained to guess rather than admit ignorance is fundamentally unsafe for medicine, law, or education. It prioritizes test scores over truth, a flaw that developers acknowledge but have been slow to fix because "honest" models often score lower on the leaderboards that drive investment. "
So, as I understand it, you're thinking that people would reject AI because it is inaccurate, while it saves them money while being inaccurate.
Unfortunately, that's not how the world works. Many people would easily sell themselves for a bit of money. That's why inaccurate AI is taking over jobs that were accurately done by humans.
Ok, you put forth medical fields - that's clearly not fixed for AI to take over yet. Still 1 field.
You put forth education. Who would argue if AI tutor has an incorrect reply? The children? The parents, who are not included? If a school can save money on teachers, what stops them?
And how about any other field? I mentioned QA, you don't touch this topic for some reason. It's easier to pay less for QA AI that makes mistakes than it is for human QA that sometimes makes mistakes. It's just cheaper. And CEOs are cheap.
So how is your theory holding against my previous comment, I wonder. You said "You don't understand it because you aren't really paying attention" - explain how is that the case, when I can give you examples that you lack, on the topics you address, and on the ones you don't.
The AI bubble will burst once people start realizing the mistakes. Once lawsuits start for wrongful death. Once people stop using companies that untlize AI for chat.
What happens when it does calculations wrong assisting in building a highrise and it collapses? I've caught it even doing basic math wrong.
I have yet to use a chat with a company where I didn't have to talk to a human being, same with if AI answers an email almost 100% of the time it answers it totally wrong and addresses something I didn't even ask about.
Even FB staff are overwhelmed with mistakes of AI banning people incorrectly. When companies have to spend more money correcting mistakes and money trying to save their customer base they will go back to humans.
Once I gave feedback to a company how great their company used to be before AI chat. I've spent a lot of money with them and guess what AI is no longer handling their chats. I assume obviously many many many other people complained as well not just me.
The AI in flock cameras have identified an insane amount of people incorrectly.
Regarding AI and flock cameras: "Roseville, California: An analysis of 1,427 alerts sent to the police between 2023 and 2024 found that 71% were incorrect, meaning approximately 1,013 alerts falsely flagged vehicles as stolen or involved in felonies. Los Angeles, California: An inspector general audit found that 161 vehicles were falsely flagged as stolen over a two-month period, with 32.3% of reviewed alerts being inaccurate. National Misuse: The Institute for Justice has documented at least 27 cases nationwide where drivers were mistakenly pulled over, detained, or arrested due to Flock alerts, with many incidents occurring since 2023. Accuracy Claims: While Flock claims >96% OCR accuracy in optimal conditions, independent tests by IPVM previously found a 10% error rate in identifying the state of origin, and critics argue that even small error rates result in thousands of wrongful stops given the scale of 120,000+ cameras in use. In summary, while a precise national total is unavailable, local audits confirm that thousands of innocent vehicles have been incorrectly flagged in isolated studies, with specific instances like Roseville showing error rates as high as 71%."
Already I've seen companies advertising real human beings answering phones.
The signs are all here for a collapse.
I would do some of your own research
Are you talking about Quality Assurance?? You think AI is better for this? How? Where's the data for this? Look into it more I can bet it's making awful mistakes.
As for teachers, parents are already catching horrible mistakes even AI making up state names that don't exist. My kids already are catching mistakes and they are in elementary school.
I am not the only person to hold this opinion. Look up AI bursting predictions.
https://youtu.be/Lf5oqGOCRCM?si=91Y_-Es_41Tp8sFa This one I haven't fully watched but I've seen clips and he seems to think similar to me but I am just showing I am not alone in this thinking.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cmzptWcRs6Q
It's not an AI bubble, it's AI that does actions way faster than a human. That's not going away, unfortunately. Even tho I want to, as you do.
Chats are mainly AI now, but you can always reach a human assistant still in most places. It only makes the AI learn when it failed.
They will NOT go back to humans, as AI is way cheaper than humans. And AI cannot go on vacation or get ill.
AI can be programmed to recognize your ID, or IP, and immediately transfer you to a human. Your single complaint doesn't stop many other companies to use AI because it's cheaper than human services. I agree that it's inhumane and wrong, but it's not what's really happening in most companies, who are greedy to the core.
The AI in cameras is supreme in comparison to humans detecting people on cameras. The mistakes it makes is way less than 2000 different employees who need a break, sleep, leave, vacations, etc. I work for such a company only to be soon replaced by AI that I am training currently.
False police alerts are useful for the police to control places that don't require their control. Meaning AI is their "excuse" for rushing into their home. Even AI's mistakes are used by the NWO, you know this.
You asked - QA is better for AI as it can track many things at once than a single human can. Surely, it makes mistakes, but you don't pay the human labor for the mistakes, or any benefits, double-pay, vacation pay, leaves, etc. It's the logical choice. I can assure you that in sports, AI is doing way better than humans, since that's my current job.
So parents are catching mistakes... They were not effective to stop the trans reading books to their children, right? So how will they stop AI?
...................
Overall, I agree that AI is bad, don't get me wrong. But it is cheaper, so many will use it. And if you notice a mistake, so what? They will still use it to enter your home, they will use it to confuse your children's education, or mistake a procedure. They don't care about us. They care only about money.
I agree with you that AI is bad. But the bad AI will only progress, that's where I don't agree with you. Unfortunately, we will see more mistakes by AI that are quickly covered up, not an uprising of humans that eventually turn AI down.
It's unfortunate, but realistic. Your idea is hopeful, but unreal. I really hope your point is correct and mine isn't. Unfortunately, that is not the case.
I agree that AI is imperfect and causing problems as you do. But I know CEOs are greedy and will ignore it because it's on our backs, not theirs. Do you see the difference?
Well I'd watch that interview with the guy who calls BS on AI I linked. I went ahead and watched it all since I linked it and he much more elegantly and technically calls out AI and the companies behind it. He covers funding and how no it actually isn't cheaper and why they will be and already are in trouble. You don't have to agree with me. We've been fed the doom and gloom of AI for awhile now. Its understandable. People on conspiracy forums do tend to believe the worst is yet to come. IMO It will remain around but not as vast as people are led to believe. It will simply be a search engine and Photoshop tool and organization tool. People used to think Photoshop was amazing and cutting edge. It isn't taking everyone's jobs. It's completely unsustainable financially and environmentally not to mention it just isn't as grand as people say. Hey I like Google lens but as a tool. At the end of the day though that's all it is a tool.
Also do you know what "The Singularity" in theory is and why they are building this and their belief behind AI? The Singularity is Near a book basically has a cult following of all these people behind AI. For almost if not 20 years they have believed that there will come a time when technology aka AI evolves so fast that it takes over everything. This is contingent on AI being sintinent and basically becoming this perfect being. They are building these data centers because they are unknowingly in a cult. They can't come to terms that the singularity and their tech God aren't coming into fruition and they are bankrupting themselves, lying about its capabilities and willing to destroy the earth so all the crap they've been listening to at seminars for 15 years comes true. Which it isn't and it's not. When you understand the psychology behind the creators of this you kind of can understand why it will fail. It isn't going to be a tech paradise where we all live basically in a perfect world with AI as our God and only do leisurely things. In the real world resources are finite and massive buildings cost a money (know why many massive old beautiful buildings get torn down?? They cost to much to keep up). If no one has jobs because AI took them and we are all in poverty on UBI who is going to be buying the products at the stores that are funding AI companies?? Communism no matter what form is always going to fail. Try reading Robots Will Steal Your Job, But That's OK to understand the thought process behind these people. No one should fear them. Just complain to companies about AI where valid and enjoy the entertainment aspect and tool part. We totally have a voice. Flock cameras everywhere are being removed because people are saying no. Data centers are being cancelled and rejected all over. We do not have to be part of their weird cult or listen to them.
Each child gets an annual amount (let's say $9000) assigned to their school to pay for their education as the situation currently stands.
If I, the parent, am educating my child, why shouldn't I get the money.
Unless you're advocating getting rid of public education entirely, in which case, yes.
A current moves so standing within it requires adaptation aka balancing by choice. A currency mimics current motion to imbalance choice.
One cannot hold onto any artificial currency while maintaining ones stance situated within the current of nature.
Being implies particular (native) within entire (nature)...a native cannot get rid of nature. Others natives suggest artifice to get rid of in the name of "entirely".
From the Christian perspective...entirely implies God. Calling public education "entirely" represents blasphemy. One cannot attach the label entire to anything within it without denying the entirety of it.
It has nothing to do with homeschooling a child. It's just one parent staying at home.
Then it sounds like a boondoggle. If one parent is staying home, they can raise the kids and remove the excuse for the education system to keep running.
It's simply pulling from federal funding allotted for child care but that is not what the 9k is for, the kids do not have to be homeschooled. It is for one parent working and the other staying home doing home duties.