3 ms·
> Now don't get me wrong, we've made a lot of progress, but I wonder if we can get these things to a place better than humans before the next economic recession
by AlexCoventry 7y ago
> Now don't get me wrong, we've made a lot of progress, but I wonder if we can get these things to a place better than humans before the next economic recession.
I don't think it's necessary to completely solve superhuman performance to achieve automation of great economic value. Some of the most famous AI achievements leverage a fairly modest intelligence improvement with massive amounts of classic automation. E.g., the AlphaGo policy/value networks, combined with MCTS.
It may also be possible for automation to reliably determine when it's encountering a situation it's going to fare badly in, and then hand off to human telepresence control. It wouldn't surprise me if the first self-driving systems worked that way.
- philipov 7y ago> and then hand off to human telepresence control. It wouldn't surprise me if the first self-driving systems worked that way. The issue is that humans fare badly in situations where they don't have to pay attention until they suddenly have a short time to react before disaster, and that's exactly the problem that "supervised" self-driving systems have been suffering from when they crash. And if you have to pay constant attention to the road anyway, I'd rather be driving myself. What's going to win won't be self-driving tech, it will be driver assist, like advanced anti-lock brakes, or self-adjusting cruise control.
- Piskvorrr 7y agoThey do. FTR, this is what killed EH: "computing...computing...computing...oh well, let's alert the human - so they can watch the crash about to happen in the next second."