Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
atosniper

Rise of the Robots

Recommended Posts

What do you guys think about AI development in the near future, and pronouncements that 'the robots will take all our jobs'?

 

There seems to be alot of noise about this recently. The title of this thread, for example, is stolen from a book of the same name published recently. It outlines how AI will transform the world in the next decade or so. That until now transformations have not led to massive unemployment, for example, farm work -> industrial work -> service work. However, the position seems to be that AI will become so powerful that humans simply wont be able to compete. There are ideas that the rich will effectively pay for most of us to receive a minimum income to live on. Those smart enough, or lucky enough could find work. I personally doubt the rich would be so willing to part with their money in such a way though. There is no such precedent in human history.

 

Thinking about employment too; there are plenty of people of average or less than average intelligence. That might not be very nice to say, but the brutal truth is that it is true. Human intelligence has not seen any large increase at all for an extremely long time. Our brains are basically still the same ones we evolved to deal with mammoths and sabre toothed tigers. So how could humans possibly compete with AI, assuming it continues to rapidly evolve its intelligence.

 

Self driving cars: they seem to have come a very long way in a short period of time. If they become ubiquitous, what happens to the large number of people employed in the transport sector? Some people answer: retraining. The problem is this is a solution that takes a great deal of time, money, resources etc. What if these people arent smart enough for the sectors open to them? It's rather disingenuous to tell a truck driver at the age of 40 to go learn high level maths and coding. And what if the AI takes those jobs shortly after...

 

Are we destined for human/machine interface? Computers plugged into the brain (or some body part/s) to see some kind of meld between humans and AI?

 

I find it hard to see how this can end well for the average joe...

 

What do you think?

Edited by atosniper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think theres too many people, and thats a problem that trumps any posed by the rise of our new android overlords.

 

putting that aside, i think we can move to an economy that revolves around wants and luxuries and unique social experiences as opposed to baseline needs that could be served up to us endlessly for free by fusion-reactor-powered mega-machines.

 

on the question of a transhuman biomechanical meld -- i think its inevitable. i would even say that for most of us in the first world, the horse has already bolted. if you imagine yourself as a detached alien observer of the human organism between waking and sleep, we're already locked into a strange permanent symbiosis with our fancy electronic tools. so what if the interfaces arent explicitly bolted on at the moment? a bus mainlined into the cortex would only be a subtle semantic shift, a slightly wider bottleneck of information exchange between 'us' and 'them'. and if it ever comes to pass that we become them, and they us -- so be it. what we are now will come to seem as quaint and distant and veritably primordial as cro magnon humans seem to us today.

Edited by @~thehung
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wholesale economic change is an inevitable consequence of automation removing jobs, just how that will occur, could be an extremely violent change in society or could be a very good improvement in quality of life.

 

I would think the best lessons at the moment can be learned from the Scandinavian nations where money is already much less tied to employment.

 

Perhaps the biggest fear though would have to be that this coming change is only going to affect the First World, leading to an even greater schism between it and the majority of humanity.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies.

 

I read that link, Cybes. Interesting and scary imho. The author finishes with the line that self driving trucks should be awesome, that we should all receive some kind of living wage and pursue those lofty goals of the human race...whatever they may be? You're a 40 year old truck driver. You only graduated from high school and arent any kind of braniac. You enjoyed hanging out with friends and family and drinking beer on the weekends. That was your lofty goal. What lofty goal is such a person going to aspire to?

 

I seriously doubt that any kind of living wage is going to be forthcoming, too. I think this idea is totally deluded. There's a graph in that article showing the income discrepancy since about 1970. If AI really does take off, the wealthy and corporations are going to hugely benefit. How could anyone be deluded enough to think they will just pay a whole mass of people to do nothing, or pursue their 'lofty goals'? Gina Rinehart, love or hate her, said not so long ago something along the lines of how she thought there were a whole bunch of lazy people and she had no problem giving them nothing. There are philanthropic wealthy people/corps out there, but I bet they are in the minority. I'm having a hard time envisaging a utopia out of this, more like a dystopia. Are we going to see something like that portrayed in the movie Elysium where the wealthy have a little enclave for themselves while the rest of us live in squalor? We, the masses, are basically living a serf, or worse, a slave-like, existence under the power of the wealthy. More like BSG where the machines (cylons) basically annihilate us?

 

Bill Gates, Elon Musk, and Stephen Hawking are all worried about this problem. If you google, you can find info on this. If you cant manage this process, then you are already obsolete :P

 

I also dont think an 'art' based economy is going to work.

 

Check out a little video on Youtube called 'Humans need not apply'. (It talks about an 'art' based economy among other things)

 

You bring up a good point about there being too many of us, Cybes. Think about this though: what do humans do when they live in poor conditions and/or not have much to do? They have more sex (which some might find a good thing :P ) but also more kids. So having a whole lot more people out of work and in poorer conditions could lead to even more meat based lifeforms.

 

I want to be optimistic about this, but based on human nature and the deviation between the rich and poor and hollowing out of the middle class over the last 30-40 years, I'm having trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ain't nobody going to buy products without a salary. The wealthy will have no choice but to have their tax dollars put back into consumer hands.

 

Humans are just sufficiently complex computers. It's inevitable that machines will supersede us in every way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humans can self repair.

Even if we're at the stage of bots taking jobs, we're a llong way away from self healing circuits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However not too far away from bots being able to make bots, in fact to a degree that is exactly what happens.

 

The next step is a bot that makes it's own replacement and then uploads itself as either a new copy or a functioning duplicate.

 

If you think about that the only reason to decommission the old unit would be excessive damage otherwise it is replication and therefore population growth.

 

What is missing at the moment is an analogue for sentience, but I really do wonder for just how long.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer nanites ,i love Borgs.

 

But it seems most techie sites are now venturing into robotics ,even schools too.

 

Really interested in Micro robotics and surgery ,it will be amazing to see them actually work on their own a programmed AI.

 

When ever i hear robotics and cars i always remember that movie called Total Recall and those Taxi's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humans can self repair.

Even if we're at the stage of bots taking jobs, we're a llong way away from self healing circuits.

 

Robots could repair other robots. Unlike humans they won't die because of infection, and their state can be backed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3D printing developments will

 

 

Humans can self repair.

Even if we're at the stage of bots taking jobs, we're a llong way away from self healing circuits.

 

Robots could repair other robots. Unlike humans they won't die because of infection, and their state can be backed up.

 

Also, its not hard to imagine that AI could quickly develop the ability for self repair. Self assembling organic circuitry already exists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3D printing developments will

 

 

Humans can self repair.

Even if we're at the stage of bots taking jobs, we're a llong way away from self healing circuits.

 

Robots could repair other robots. Unlike humans they won't die because of infection, and their state can be backed up.

 

Also, its not hard to imagine that AI could quickly develop the ability for self repair. Self assembling organic circuitry already exists.

 

Suppose.

It does make you feel a lot less empathy toward other humans when you realise how inferior we really are.

 

I mean, why bother when something else can do it better,

 

I dont try to hammer with my screwdriver.

Edited by Master_Scythe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer nanites ,i love Borgs.

 

But it seems most techie sites are now venturing into robotics ,even schools too.

 

Really interested in Micro robotics and surgery ,it will be amazing to see them actually work on their own a programmed AI.

 

When ever i hear robotics and cars i always remember that movie called Total Recall and those Taxi's.

How do you mean by prefer code ?

 

Nanotech is off in the dark spectrum but already, in fact for a decade or more there have been a combination of cautions and obstacles being presented.

 

Cautions because if nanos became sentient you really could have a problem - would have to scour the Sf shelves to give you imagined examples but John Varley's "Steel Beach" had a lot of hints.

 

Obstacles mostly because of the mechanical aspects - I do not have a problem seeing cpu tech disappear down the rabbit hole of infinitely smaller but the pragmatic of lubricating nano machinery is not a trivial matter at all.

 

In the physical world we have to adapt to variations of friction, temperature, humidity, contamination, nanos are not yet at all well adapted for any of those, but seems to me nanobots need to get around.

 

I have no doubt those issues could be overcome, and when something is possible it becomes reality, but I'm not too sure I am completely comfortable about nanotech :)

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have no doubt those issues could be overcome, and when something is possible it becomes reality, but I'm not too sure I am completely comfortable about nanotech :)

 

Cheers

 

 

I would be.

 

Assuming it was weak to the same current tech so I can be EMP'd afterward to know they're gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:)

 

That, M_S is a rather big assumption, I do not have your faith that it will evolve that way :)

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Suppose.

It does make you feel a lot less empathy toward other humans when you realise how inferior we really are.

 

I mean, why bother when something else can do it better,

 

I dont try to hammer with my screwdriver.

 

 

If we can build computers better than ourselves, then are we not first generation gods? I couldn't think of a more honourable title.

 

I'm not sure I understand why this would negatively effect empathy. Wouldn't it make you more empathetic?

Edited by .:Cyb3rGlitch:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" If we can build computers better than ourselves, then are we not first generation gods? I couldn't think of a more honourable title."

 

Given the atrocities that people currently commit under the banner of their chosen god, I find the above a wee bit scary ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The robots can never take away our jobs - we'll just create more.

 

If robots take over every single table-waiting job in every single restaurant and cafe, all those people won't be out of work. They'll get into some other new industry that is created to make use of the available labour. Fixing robots, counselling people on how to deal with robots, massaging my feet when I can't be bothered to get up every hours from my computer, or any number of things we haven't thought of yet.

 

That's what happens any time automation is expanded into an industry. If it's slow, no one notices. If it's fast, people lose their jobs in the short term en masse, and strike and picket and lobby governments to ban the automation. But it still happens regardless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well nanotechnology is still beyond the reaches of most minds due to the scope of its complexity in production. Everything is done in micro worlds and thus needing great brain power to produce. Secondly the programs to make nanotech Robots would be far more stabler than the current robot technology.

 

Just think of the things nanotechnology could achieve ,medically it could save lives get rid of disease ,infections and cancers. Yes its a dream built on imagination but anything would be possible with technology so small. It would make normal robotics cry in shame.

 

In Space it could repair spacecraft on the fly and built into the panels in ships to repair holes and dents.

Edited by codecreeper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the most interesting commentaries that I've read on nanotech speak of it being built around a hive mind concept, very little individual sentience but a few billion bots assembled like neurons and you have intelligence.

 

I find that rather frightening but also rather plausible.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the most interesting commentaries that I've read on nanotech speak of it being built around a hive mind concept, very little individual sentience but a few billion bots assembled like neurons and you have intelligence.

 

I find that rather frightening but also rather plausible.

 

Cheers

 

It's also the only way it works. When you put a lot of intelligent* agents in one place, all you get is noise. Look at Parliament. ;p

(*Jokes aside, I think we can agree that even Tony is smarter than a cockroach, and our best GeneralAIs at the moment are not even that good yet.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh :)

 

I dunno, the tendency is to try to define machine intelligence by comparison to the human kind - that may well not be relevant. The field is advancing so damned fast but neuron sized limited sentience will I hope remain a ways off.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh :)

 

I dunno, the tendency is to try to define machine intelligence by comparison to the human kind - that may well not be relevant. The field is advancing so damned fast but neuron sized limited sentience will I hope remain a ways off.

 

Cheers

 

The real problem with that, afaics, is that the general public get in on the conversation and we have muddied ideas wrt the definition of "intelligence" - ones which include self-awareness (hell, awareness in general!), and emotional response.

 

People involved with AI use the term far more rigidly: the ability to solve problems. In the case of GAI, that includes defining the problem, given a bunch of seemingly-random data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They say i get intelligent when i get challenged ,but have a tendency not to display it . Wonder why?

 

Robotics i love looking at ,its like watching a baby grow up. It will get better its just that its complicated to understand.

 

US is working on robots to be deployed to the field for fighting but one thing always stops it from happening ,is Weight. Secondly any robots put on the field need to be re-armed. Maybe a robot that use ammo created from ice could be a good form ,liquid nitrogen could freeze moisture in the air creating a bullet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×