This is a OpenAI news story, published by Vox, that relates primarily to Sam Altman news.
For more OpenAI news, you can click here:
more OpenAI newsFor more Sam Altman news, you can click here:
more Sam Altman newsFor more Us federal policies news, you can click here:
more Us federal policies newsFor more news from Vox, you can click here:
more news from VoxOtherweb, Inc is a public benefit corporation, dedicated to improving the quality of news people consume. We are non-partisan, junk-free, and ad-free. We use artificial intelligence (AI) to remove junk from your news feed, and allow you to select the best politics news, business news, entertainment news, and much more. If you like this article about Us federal policies, you might also like this article about
other basic income experiments. We are dedicated to bringing you the highest-quality news, junk-free and ad-free, about your favorite topics. Please come every day to read the latest basic income debate news, income pilot experiments news, news about Us federal policies, and other high-quality news about any topic that interests you. We are working hard to create the best news aggregator on the web, and to put you in control of your news feed - whether you choose to read the latest news through our website, our news app, or our daily newsletter - all free!
Many other basic income pilotsVox
•81% Informative
The study gave 1,000 recipients $ 1,000 per month, no strings attached.
It’s one of the biggest and longest trials ever run on direct cash giving.
The study was run by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and OpenResearch , who has received $24 million from Altman .
But hitching the case for basic income to fears of rapid AI progress makes it vulnerable.
A new study on basic income experiments in the U.S. shows that people work a little less after receiving an extra $ 1,000 per month.
The study also found that recipients went to hospitals, doctors, and dentists more often, and spent about $20 more per month on medical care as a result of the transfer.
The results suggest policymakers interested in improving particular health outcomes might be better.
Frida Ghitis: Unconditional income study found stress reduction in recipients reduced in first year .
She asks: Why is there such a big difference between positive stories that people are telling about their experiences, and the numbers tell? Ghitis says we should insulate the case for basic income from potential AI bubbles.
She says the strongest arguments for unconditional income don’t need to rest on speculation.
VR Score
82
Informative language
80
Neutral language
50
Article tone
informal
Language
English
Language complexity
51
Offensive language
not offensive
Hate speech
not hateful
Attention-grabbing headline
not detected
Known propaganda techniques
not detected
Time-value
medium-lived
External references
30
Source diversity
25
Affiliate links
no affiliate links