4 ms·
What is the timeline you're putting to this? If it's 500 years, sure, speculate away; but if you think these things are going to materialize in the near future
by theossuary 10y ago
What is the timeline you're putting to this? If it's 500 years, sure, speculate away; but if you think these things are going to materialize in the near future then I think you're crazy.
ML is not to the point where we can hand it a bunch of data, some features, and have it control robotic arms with near human ability. Not even close. There just isn't enough data or computational power (in a small enough package anyway); not to mention robotics are still really in their infancy, we've barely got a four legged robot jumping over a single object head on.
I think you're really underestimating energy and computational requirements; these systems would need an umbilical cord to a datacenter and power to even function. This isn't even discussing the need for them to learn, which would be a requirement for more complex jobs like folding clothes or moving through unmapped environments.
I think automation has been put forward as a boogieman to those who don't know better so UBI can be pushed forward. We aren't even close to a time when machines are able to repair themselves, or function semi-autonomously in an environment not strictly built to support it.
We're going to be in this kludge for a long long time. Sure unemployment will go up with automation, but it'll be a slow plotting course with a lot of stopgaps put in place. Eventually when that becomes burdensome enough we may revisit UBI, but we haven't reached that point yet, not even close.
- mythrwy 10y agoSometimes people become so enamored with abstraction they forget about underlying physical reality.