4 ms·

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

by exit 9y ago

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

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

by 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