4 ms·

This reminds me of a certain cyberpunk staple where a team is assembled by an AI for a task(omitted to not spoil). I wonder if we'll get to the point where this

This reminds me of a certain cyberpunk staple where a team is assembled by an AI for a task(omitted to not spoil). I wonder if we'll get to the point where this team assembly is mostly automated or if there are things that it will remain cheaper/ more effective to keep humans making the hiring decisions? They say they are using AI, but it was unclear if they are using AI to train on human-picked teams now or if they already have a model that is working.

exit 9y ago
i feel like an ai capable of assembling a team of humans for tackling a task will have better things to do than assembling teams of humans for tackling tasks
- justonepost 9y ago
  Not to spoil too much but the task was definitely a part of the reason why it didn't have better things to do. Neuromancer, by William Gibson definitely a classic
  - throwanem 9y ago
    "Not to spoil too much", you say - and proceed to identify the novel of which GP's comment spoils the entire plot. Granted, more than thirty years after publication I'm not sure spoilers are still worth worrying about. But, you know, internal consistency is a thing, too...
  - jcadam 9y ago
    Damnit, I'm actually reading that novel (for the first time) right now.
  - s73ver 9y ago
    SPOILER QUESTION So the thing mentioned above is not something you know from the get go?
    - Pulcinella 9y ago
      No but you find it maybe around halfway through the novel. It is definitely not like the main twist or anything.
- Jtsummers 9y ago
  In the real-world, planning algorithms are AI so this isn't really so unreasonable. Supply the AI planner with a set of tasks (objectives) and let it plan out what needs to be done. Provide it with a set of actuators (this could be people, software, physical systems) which are capable of, given some input, accomplishing the tasks needed for the final objective(s). Give the same planner or a separate one the authority to act within various constraints (time objectives, financial and other resource constraints). EDIT: Honestly, I could see a lot of intermediary jobs being replaced or largely displaced by such a planner. As an example, the USAF has a role called "Item Manager". Their job is to track materiel (primarily) needed for various systems and customers, and make sure that they're available when they need to be, get serviced when they need to be, are replaced when they need to be. A (very abstract) example might be a particular ground vehicle, let's say trucks. They have maintenance schedules, they have spare parts that are needed, and replacements need to be available should one irreparably breakdown. So an IM may be responsible for every truck of that kind for 100 customers (various squadrons around the world) each with maybe 10-20 trucks on average. A lot of their work is already semi-automated, but with sufficient care the full scheduling of maintenance, receipt of damage reports, maintaining a supply of spare parts and trucks, can be fully automated. With a human perhaps only involved to assess the damage reports submitted from the field, and to periodically sanity check the numbers, and to actually authorize spending requests. The AI planner can be given all the information needed (including budget, shipping logistics, storage availability) to do a lot of the planning itself.
  - mattnewton 9y ago
    These types of "AI" would also benefit from some old fashioned rules-based systems too, so that they could be audited for legal compliance (for example, it is desirable that they provably do not discriminate against protected classes in the US)
- throwanem 9y ago
  Really? Humans are unparalleled when it comes to doing things in the physical world. An AI interested in doing things in the physical world could do much worse than to assemble a team of humans and give them a reason to want to accomplish the things it wants done.
  - srtjstjsj 9y ago
    unparalleled? the vast majority of physical work is done by machines. humans are the gods in the gaps
    - throwanem 9y ago
      You're wrong about who does most of the work. But even if you weren't - who builds the machines?
      - che_shirecat 9y ago
        other machines. much more efficiently too. programming those machines is gap work
beisner 9y ago
I've heard about some hedge fund trying to work on something along these lines. I don't know enough about the program to discuss its technical merit, but it's broad goal is to systematize management, and build really detailed profiles of employee strengths and weaknesses in all kinds of disciplines, specifically for the purpose of team formation and management.
- davidlee1435 9y ago
  Bridgewater Associates[1]? From what I could gather, they have a very unique company culture to the point of being cultish. [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-worlds-largest-hedge-fund-is-building-an-algorithmic-model-of-its-founders-brain-1482423694 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-worlds-largest-hedge-fund-i...
s73ver 9y ago
I could see AI selecting a set of candidates, but I don't think the people running the show would be willing to delegate the actual hiring of them to an AI.
- mattnewton 9y ago
  Maybe with human review, but that's how you get the one-click team they talk about in the article to scale, no?
smaps 9y ago
That is one of my favorite books!
- TranquilMarmot 9y ago
  I just finished the whole trilogy, really an amazing piece of work.
bitL 9y ago
AI capable of assembling a truly great team would be probably on a higher level than all the candidates it gets to evaluate ;-)
- mattnewton 9y ago
  I don't think this follows at all, I think it could more easily be interpreted as a narrow AI problem than a general intelligence problem, where you respond to signals and hire/ fire much the same way high frequency trading works. Those bots make complex decisions based on all the signals they can pipe in, but no one thinks that they can build themselves robotic bodies to go out and develop houses for sale if they detect real estate is going to go up :)

exit 9y ago

i feel like an ai capable of assembling a team of humans for tackling a task will have better things to do than assembling teams of humans for tackling tasks

justonepost 9y ago
Not to spoil too much but the task was definitely a part of the reason why it didn't have better things to do. Neuromancer, by William Gibson definitely a classic
- throwanem 9y ago
  "Not to spoil too much", you say - and proceed to identify the novel of which GP's comment spoils the entire plot. Granted, more than thirty years after publication I'm not sure spoilers are still worth worrying about. But, you know, internal consistency is a thing, too...
- jcadam 9y ago
  Damnit, I'm actually reading that novel (for the first time) right now.
- s73ver 9y ago
  SPOILER QUESTION So the thing mentioned above is not something you know from the get go?
  - Pulcinella 9y ago
    No but you find it maybe around halfway through the novel. It is definitely not like the main twist or anything.
Jtsummers 9y ago
In the real-world, planning algorithms are AI so this isn't really so unreasonable. Supply the AI planner with a set of tasks (objectives) and let it plan out what needs to be done. Provide it with a set of actuators (this could be people, software, physical systems) which are capable of, given some input, accomplishing the tasks needed for the final objective(s). Give the same planner or a separate one the authority to act within various constraints (time objectives, financial and other resource constraints). EDIT: Honestly, I could see a lot of intermediary jobs being replaced or largely displaced by such a planner. As an example, the USAF has a role called "Item Manager". Their job is to track materiel (primarily) needed for various systems and customers, and make sure that they're available when they need to be, get serviced when they need to be, are replaced when they need to be. A (very abstract) example might be a particular ground vehicle, let's say trucks. They have maintenance schedules, they have spare parts that are needed, and replacements need to be available should one irreparably breakdown. So an IM may be responsible for every truck of that kind for 100 customers (various squadrons around the world) each with maybe 10-20 trucks on average. A lot of their work is already semi-automated, but with sufficient care the full scheduling of maintenance, receipt of damage reports, maintaining a supply of spare parts and trucks, can be fully automated. With a human perhaps only involved to assess the damage reports submitted from the field, and to periodically sanity check the numbers, and to actually authorize spending requests. The AI planner can be given all the information needed (including budget, shipping logistics, storage availability) to do a lot of the planning itself.
- mattnewton 9y ago
  These types of "AI" would also benefit from some old fashioned rules-based systems too, so that they could be audited for legal compliance (for example, it is desirable that they provably do not discriminate against protected classes in the US)
throwanem 9y ago
Really? Humans are unparalleled when it comes to doing things in the physical world. An AI interested in doing things in the physical world could do much worse than to assemble a team of humans and give them a reason to want to accomplish the things it wants done.
- srtjstjsj 9y ago
  unparalleled? the vast majority of physical work is done by machines. humans are the gods in the gaps
  - throwanem 9y ago
    You're wrong about who does most of the work. But even if you weren't - who builds the machines?
    - che_shirecat 9y ago
      other machines. much more efficiently too. programming those machines is gap work

beisner 9y ago

I've heard about some hedge fund trying to work on something along these lines. I don't know enough about the program to discuss its technical merit, but it's broad goal is to systematize management, and build really detailed profiles of employee strengths and weaknesses in all kinds of disciplines, specifically for the purpose of team formation and management.

davidlee1435 9y ago
Bridgewater Associates[1]? From what I could gather, they have a very unique company culture to the point of being cultish. [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-worlds-largest-hedge-fund-is-building-an-algorithmic-model-of-its-founders-brain-1482423694 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-worlds-largest-hedge-fund-i...

s73ver 9y ago

I could see AI selecting a set of candidates, but I don't think the people running the show would be willing to delegate the actual hiring of them to an AI.

mattnewton 9y ago
Maybe with human review, but that's how you get the one-click team they talk about in the article to scale, no?

smaps 9y ago

That is one of my favorite books!

TranquilMarmot 9y ago
I just finished the whole trilogy, really an amazing piece of work.

bitL 9y ago

AI capable of assembling a truly great team would be probably on a higher level than all the candidates it gets to evaluate ;-)

mattnewton 9y ago
I don't think this follows at all, I think it could more easily be interpreted as a narrow AI problem than a general intelligence problem, where you respond to signals and hire/ fire much the same way high frequency trading works. Those bots make complex decisions based on all the signals they can pipe in, but no one thinks that they can build themselves robotic bodies to go out and develop houses for sale if they detect real estate is going to go up :)