Artificial Intelligence: Are You Concerned?

[Kiwibrown]

8 minutes ago, mistakey said:

think about this:
human stupidity is designing AI

That’s probably how we will defeat the robot overlords. 

A guy called bob from Kentucky or something.

[mistakey]

Just now, Kiwibrown said:

That’s probably how we will defeat the robot overlords. 

A guy called bob from Kentucky or something.

i dunno man im gonna try and start designing robot weed and creating pro robot propaganda so hopefully they spare me when the time comes

(just kidding but only kinda, the person who does that might be safe)

[theJ]

16 hours ago, mistakey said:

thats the worry of General Artificial Intelligence, right?

we created AI that beat kasparov in chess in 95, and just finished go.  i think you're underestimating how soon it could come, especially since this is the new race to a nuclear weapon for every large nation state.  

The AI that can beat you or I in chess is very different than an AI than the AI you're talking about.  The difference is one that plays a game within the confines of a set of rules, to one that can change the rules when it feels like it.  

One is possible to program.  One is currently impossible to program.

[theJ]

14 hours ago, packerrfan74 said:

AI is entering the service industry at a very fast rate as well though. Look at McDonalds. They are replacing their cashiers with automated ordering systems.. Hotels, nowadays you can book a room, select your room, and receive your key on your phone without ever even seeing or speaking with a rep.

That's not so much AI as it is turning the register around and letting the customer use it, lol.  It's akin to getting rid of the guy at the gas pump to pump your gas for you.  Why do i need a guy to punch in the machine that i want a double cheeseburger with pickles?  I'm pretty sure 99% of the population can figure that out.

[theJ]

13 hours ago, Woz said:

Next two major targets for AI breakthroughs in terms of severely disrupting the labor pool: law and medicine.

Doesn't have to be "blue collar."

From what i've read and listened to on AI in those industries, the AI being designed there currently is more of a supplement to help the human get the case right.

That being said, i wouldn't rule out that some sort of AI eliminates some jobs in those industries in the future.  If there's a way for companies to replace 10-$100,000 workers with a $5M machine, they're probably going to do it.

[mistakey]

9 minutes ago, theJ said:

The AI that can beat you or I in chess is very different than an AI than the AI you're talking about.  The difference is one that plays a game within the confines of a set of rules, to one that can change the rules when it feels like it.  

One is possible to program.  One is currently impossible to program.

Ah your key word there is currently

[theJ]

1 minute ago, mistakey said:

Ah your key word there is currently

Yes it is.

I'll put it this way.  I think you could fast forward to 2050, jump on this forum (if it still exists), and have the exact same conversation then as we're having now.  We're going to be saying this for a long time.  

[pollino14]

29 minutes ago, theJ said:

From what i've read and listened to on AI in those industries, the AI being designed there currently is more of a supplement to help the human get the case right.

That being said, i wouldn't rule out that some sort of AI eliminates some jobs in those industries in the future.  If there's a way for companies to replace 10-$100,000 workers with a $5M machine, they're probably going to do it.

In all honesty, AI is probably going to take jobs in all industries, especially the medical field. Being able to read things like abnormalities in the body, AI will  be able to match it with the specific disease .

[theJ]

1 hour ago, pollino14 said:

In all honesty, AI is probably going to take jobs in all industries, especially the medical field. Being able to read things like abnormalities in the body, AI will  be able to match it with the specific disease .

Oh i agree.  Computers in general have already taken jobs from about sector except IT, haha.  

For example: while doing some renovations of an old building at work, we came across a picture from the 1950's.  At the time, the building was packed full of drafters doing piping, architecture, etc for this one site.  Now, they have 3 full time drafters performing the same function.  Computers have made the job faster, easier and more accurate.

It's going the same way in a lot of fields.  Computers and better intelligence are making people's jobs faster, easier and more accurate.  Which inevitably leads to being able to do jobs with less people.

[mistakey]

1 hour ago, theJ said:

Yes it is.

I'll put it this way.  I think you could fast forward to 2050, jump on this forum (if it still exists), and have the exact same conversation then as we're having now.  We're going to be saying this for a long time.  

and i think you're off by a couple of decades. 2030 or 2040 imo.  whoever gets quantum computers first will be well on their way

[mistakey]

5 minutes ago, theJ said:

Oh i agree.  Computers in general have already taken jobs from about sector except IT, haha.  

For example: while doing some renovations of an old building at work, we came across a picture from the 1950's.  At the time, the building was packed full of drafters doing piping, architecture, etc for this one site.  Now, they have 3 full time drafters performing the same function.  Computers have made the job faster, easier and more accurate.

It's going the same way in a lot of fields.  Computers and better intelligence are making people's jobs faster, easier and more accurate.  Which inevitably leads to being able to do jobs with less people.

we write scripts nearly every day to consolidate human functions even in the IT sector... 

[theJ]

5 minutes ago, mistakey said:

we write scripts nearly every day to consolidate human functions even in the IT sector... 

Oh sure, but there's more IT personnel now than there were 50 years ago.  The comment was tongue in cheek.  Nothing to really debate there.

[theJ]

7 minutes ago, mistakey said:

and i think you're off by a couple of decades. 2030 or 2040 imo.  whoever gets quantum computers first will be well on their way

Bookmarked for a 2040 showdown!  Haha.

[cddolphin]

15 hours ago, Woz said:

Current size of the labor force in the US is ~160M. 16M people suddenly having no job and no job prospects is a major problem.

There's also the 2nd and 3rd order effects: insurance salespeople (yes, don't like them, but they are jobs), repair shops, people in aftermarket parts supply chain, gas station attendants, truck stop workers, people working a dealerships ... those are just off the top of my head.

I want a self-driving car. At the same time, I'm not ignoring that this will be incredibly disruptive to the labor market (and potentially the societal fabric).

Oh it will certainly be disruptive. There will be a re-shuffling of the deck and some cards will get bent. But this post essentially highlighted why in the long run you shouldn't be concerned:

34 minutes ago, theJ said:

For example: while doing some renovations of an old building at work, we came across a picture from the 1950's.  At the time, the building was packed full of drafters doing piping, architecture, etc for this one site.  Now, they have 3 full time drafters performing the same function.  Computers have made the job faster, easier and more accurate.

We're not still feeling the effects of all those out-of-work drafters and laborers 50 years later. When cars became mainstream, the no longer needed ranchers, saddle-makers, stableboys didn't all permanently disappear from the labor market.

It should be the same for self-driving cars; in the long run, freeing up people from what could be automated and allowing them to focus on other tasks is only a good thing for progress.

[Heimdallr]

51 minutes ago, cddolphin said:

Oh it will certainly be disruptive. There will be a re-shuffling of the deck and some cards will get bent. But this post essentially highlighted why in the long run you shouldn't be concerned:

We're not still feeling the effects of all those out-of-work drafters and laborers 50 years later. When cars became mainstream, the no longer needed ranchers, saddle-makers, stableboys didn't all permanently disappear from the labor market.

It should be the same for self-driving cars; in the long run, freeing up people from what could be automated and allowing them to focus on other tasks is only a good thing for progress.

The difference is that in previous shifts, jobs just moved from one unskilled sector to another.

As manufacturing took over, farmers became factory workers. As globalization took over, factory worked became truck drivers. The new industries still required low-skill* human jobs.

What happens when the shift no longer requires human jobs? Everyone is supposed to go get electrical engineering and computer science degrees to start programming and building robots? It is a completely different (and for a lot of people impossible) change.

In a theoretical world where anyone is willing and able to learn anything in order to get a job, it might be great if all the menial labor jobs went to robots and everyone could do less strenuous jobs, but that is nowhere near reality.

 

* before anyone throws a fit, I'm not taking a shot at truck drivers or factory workers, etc. "low skill" just refers to a job that people can easily transition into without a degree or advanced training.