5 ms·

Still, the concept of robots killing jobs forever is exaggerated. AI is incredible and only going to become even more incredible. But the creativity of the hum

by m52go 9y ago

Still, the concept of robots killing jobs forever is exaggerated. AI is incredible and only going to become even more incredible. But the creativity of the human spirit will always reign supreme. A robot cannot start a new venture to fill a human need. Only a human can. A robot cannot write a new novel, make a new movie, or craft a new play. Only a human can. A robot cannot solve a human's medical crisis. Only a human can. A robot cannot govern a people. Only a human can. A robot cannot create a video game from start to finish. Only a human can. I could go on forever. Because almost everything a robot can do must be started + guided + improved by a human before it can be consumed by a human. And ultimately, humans consume, not robots--so that's never going to change. So while it's true automation can greatly help in all those endeavors, and eliminate lots of jobs in the process (and probably concentrate the value created much more than it was in the past), there will always be more opportunities for humans to be valuable. Perhaps that means the companies of the future will be smaller and more focused. Perhaps not. But it does not mean that human beings will be worthless. > Human labor both physical and mental is now being obsoleted, this has never happened before, industrialization was not remotely the same. I don't buy it.

gnaritas 9y ago
Virtually everything you said "only a human can" is a religious belief. Robots will be able to write novels and make movies and craft plays and solve medical crisis (all of these are being done already in simplistic forms). Bitcoin is already an implementation of an algorithm governing people, you could go on forever making incorrect statements, but they'd still be incorrect. > There will always be more opportunities for humans to be valuable. This simply isn't remotely true. While there will always be a place for the smartest and most creative humans, most humans aren't that smart or that creative and won't be able to compete with AI labor. Stop thinking in anecdotes and see the bigger picture, in a world of thinking machines, there will be little need for human labor, certainly not enough need to keep most humans employed at the levels needed to support themselves. > So while it's true automation can greatly help in all those endeavors, and eliminate lots of jobs in the process (and probably concentrate the value created much more than it was in the past), there will always be more opportunities for humans to be valuable. Not as many as have been eliminated; that's the point you seem to miss, new jobs will not be added at the rate they're being eliminated in a world of smart machines because the smart machines will be doing those new jobs as well. > I don't buy it. It's true none the less.
- nicky0 9y ago
  You call GP's view religious but yours is no less dogmatic.
  - gnaritas 9y ago
    False, my views are in line with the evidence. Beyond that, is the belief that something is impossible that is nearly always religious, not the one backed by evidence that says no, those things are already happening.
    - nicky0 9y ago
      You lack self-awareness.
      - gnaritas 9y ago
        An easy to make yet baseless accusation, how childish.
        nicky0 9y ago
        It is based on the content of your posts.
- dilemma 9y ago
  Machines will never be able to write novels or direct films. Much less act in them.
  - gnaritas 9y ago
    They already are; google a bit, you're behind the times.
petra 9y ago
One way to divide job types is:physical/mental/emotional/creative. It seems plausible that robots could do physical and mental jobs. There's a debate regarding creative jobs, but we already have good preliminary results, and once we crack some of the mental building blocks(like conceptual representation and abstraction), it's plausible we could get creativity in many domains. As for the arts: they require a complex mix of mental, emotional and creative skills, so we'll see. As for deep emotional jobs, for example, like a psychologist - it's hard to imagine people forming deep relationships with robots, etc. So maybe emotional jobs are the future of jobs. The big question is - how could you create low-unemployment economy around that ?
- gnaritas 9y ago
  See, you get it. Yes, there will always be some human jobs, but not remotely enough to have a wage labor based economy built on. We call them starving artists already, there's no demand for a hundred million more artists. Robots will eliminate blue collar work and that eliminates the foundation of our economy.
saurik 9y ago
> A robot cannot solve a human's medical crisis. Only a human can. Most of what doctors do is pretty routine and we already have AIs that best them at it; we have bigger issues with getting people to trust these systems than to actually build them. The result will then mean that instead of an army of doctors doing basic diagnoses and occasionally hearing a hard problem, we will need a handful of doctors working on hard problems. This is what automation does: it doesn't fully replace all of a thing, but it drastically reduces the number of people needed. I mean, to take all of your other examples: maybe you are right that an AI can't design a video game from start to end, but the insanely large number of people who work on a video game are people doing extremely boring tasks of modelling and motion capture. Imagine making a movie where you just have a writer, a director, a costume artist, and a set designer, and every other role is replaced by a computer.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
maneesh 9y ago
https://28oa9i1t08037ue3m1l0i861-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/only-humans-cartoon.jpg https://28oa9i1t08037ue3m1l0i861-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-...
- m52go 9y ago
  And I predict the posters on that wall will be replaced for every generation. The simple logical flaw with the notion that robots will render human beings useless: okay, then who makes the robots better? Who designs them? Who helps them? Who repairs them? Etc. There's going to be a whole economy around these things that many people in this thread seem to be oblivious about.
  - gnaritas 9y ago
    No one is oblivious, you simply fail to understand the nature of automation. Yes, humans will be making those robots better, but it'll only be a handful of humans, not the millions displaced by the robots. Everyone displaced by a robot in a blue collar job isn't going to suddenly turn into millions of millions of jobs designing and repairing robots. Repair won't even be a thing, they'll simply be replaced by new robots that were built by other robots. Automation replaces millions of people with robots and a few thousand people. The new jobs created are higher and higher skilled jobs always in lower and lower numbers never enough to cover the jobs displaced by the automation. If automation created as many jobs as it destroyed, it wouldn't be improving efficiency and no one would be doing it. It is precisely because it destroys jobs cumulatively that people automate because that's called efficiency and it creates wealthy for the robot owners by funneling the money that would have went to human salaries to those owners.

by m52go 9y ago

gnaritas 9y ago

Virtually everything you said "only a human can" is a religious belief. Robots will be able to write novels and make movies and craft plays and solve medical crisis (all of these are being done already in simplistic forms). Bitcoin is already an implementation of an algorithm governing people, you could go on forever making incorrect statements, but they'd still be incorrect. > There will always be more opportunities for humans to be valuable. This simply isn't remotely true. While there will always be a place for the smartest and most creative humans, most humans aren't that smart or that creative and won't be able to compete with AI labor. Stop thinking in anecdotes and see the bigger picture, in a world of thinking machines, there will be little need for human labor, certainly not enough need to keep most humans employed at the levels needed to support themselves. > So while it's true automation can greatly help in all those endeavors, and eliminate lots of jobs in the process (and probably concentrate the value created much more than it was in the past), there will always be more opportunities for humans to be valuable. Not as many as have been eliminated; that's the point you seem to miss, new jobs will not be added at the rate they're being eliminated in a world of smart machines because the smart machines will be doing those new jobs as well. > I don't buy it. It's true none the less.

nicky0 9y ago
You call GP's view religious but yours is no less dogmatic.
- gnaritas 9y ago
  False, my views are in line with the evidence. Beyond that, is the belief that something is impossible that is nearly always religious, not the one backed by evidence that says no, those things are already happening.
  - nicky0 9y ago
    You lack self-awareness.
    - gnaritas 9y ago
      An easy to make yet baseless accusation, how childish.
      - nicky0 9y ago
        It is based on the content of your posts.
dilemma 9y ago
Machines will never be able to write novels or direct films. Much less act in them.
- gnaritas 9y ago
  They already are; google a bit, you're behind the times.

petra 9y ago

One way to divide job types is:physical/mental/emotional/creative. It seems plausible that robots could do physical and mental jobs. There's a debate regarding creative jobs, but we already have good preliminary results, and once we crack some of the mental building blocks(like conceptual representation and abstraction), it's plausible we could get creativity in many domains. As for the arts: they require a complex mix of mental, emotional and creative skills, so we'll see. As for deep emotional jobs, for example, like a psychologist - it's hard to imagine people forming deep relationships with robots, etc. So maybe emotional jobs are the future of jobs. The big question is - how could you create low-unemployment economy around that ?

gnaritas 9y ago
See, you get it. Yes, there will always be some human jobs, but not remotely enough to have a wage labor based economy built on. We call them starving artists already, there's no demand for a hundred million more artists. Robots will eliminate blue collar work and that eliminates the foundation of our economy.

saurik 9y ago

> A robot cannot solve a human's medical crisis. Only a human can. Most of what doctors do is pretty routine and we already have AIs that best them at it; we have bigger issues with getting people to trust these systems than to actually build them. The result will then mean that instead of an army of doctors doing basic diagnoses and occasionally hearing a hard problem, we will need a handful of doctors working on hard problems. This is what automation does: it doesn't fully replace all of a thing, but it drastically reduces the number of people needed. I mean, to take all of your other examples: maybe you are right that an AI can't design a video game from start to end, but the insanely large number of people who work on a video game are people doing extremely boring tasks of modelling and motion capture. Imagine making a movie where you just have a writer, a director, a costume artist, and a set designer, and every other role is replaced by a computer.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

maneesh 9y ago

https://28oa9i1t08037ue3m1l0i861-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/only-humans-cartoon.jpg https://28oa9i1t08037ue3m1l0i861-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-...

m52go 9y ago
And I predict the posters on that wall will be replaced for every generation. The simple logical flaw with the notion that robots will render human beings useless: okay, then who makes the robots better? Who designs them? Who helps them? Who repairs them? Etc. There's going to be a whole economy around these things that many people in this thread seem to be oblivious about.
- gnaritas 9y ago
  No one is oblivious, you simply fail to understand the nature of automation. Yes, humans will be making those robots better, but it'll only be a handful of humans, not the millions displaced by the robots. Everyone displaced by a robot in a blue collar job isn't going to suddenly turn into millions of millions of jobs designing and repairing robots. Repair won't even be a thing, they'll simply be replaced by new robots that were built by other robots. Automation replaces millions of people with robots and a few thousand people. The new jobs created are higher and higher skilled jobs always in lower and lower numbers never enough to cover the jobs displaced by the automation. If automation created as many jobs as it destroyed, it wouldn't be improving efficiency and no one would be doing it. It is precisely because it destroys jobs cumulatively that people automate because that's called efficiency and it creates wealthy for the robot owners by funneling the money that would have went to human salaries to those owners.