3 ms·

Doing this would require an AGI, which is currently out of reach. A more useful/practical question would be: what tools can we build to assist CEOs in their de

Doing this would require an AGI, which is currently out of reach. A more useful/practical question would be: what tools can we build to assist CEOs in their decision making and make them more productive? I think the answer will come out as "not much", since the job is so high level and abstract. You'd have a better time targeting lower-skilled jobs or technical jobs like software engineering.

visarga 5y ago
> A more useful/practical question would be: what tools can we build to assist CEOs in their decision making and make them more productive? They are called data scientists. An AI would be able to crunch numbers, but someone needs to read and interpret the results. You can't automate that part yet, humans are still the best in interpreting data into social and business context.
teawrecks 5y ago
Explain why an AGI is needed? Because to me, invoking the need for an AGI sounds equivalent to saying you don't understand the problem space.
- fighterpilot 5y ago
  The job of a CEO would need AGI because it's the type of job that requires understanding of human social dynamics, market context, regulatory context, etc. Such cross domain multi faceted expertise is the type of thing that needs general and broad intelligence to do effectively. Hire people, fire people, pitch investors, manage direct reports across multiple business lines, understand what's going on in the world and market, set a product vision/direction, shape the culture of the org, etc etc. That's AGI territory.
  - niceairport 5y ago
    I have mixed feelings between your response and the response you are replying to. One one hand I can clearly see how what you're saying makes sense. On the other, I still am inclined to believe that if you really distilled the actual purpose of everything you mentioned, it could be formulated in a way that doesn't require AGI.
    - fighterpilot 5y ago
      I think one thing to consider is the non-stationary distributions in the problem space. We may be able to formulate our current understanding of what it takes to be a CEO in every feasible future context that we can imagine, and create an agent (not an AGI) that does that. But then what would happen when the distributions change out of sample in an unforseeable way? Suppose two countries go to war and this drastically changes the operating environment of the business. The agent would need to learn how to operate with human-level capability in this novel environment which it wasn't trained specifically to do. That's why I'm thinking it requires an AGI.

visarga 5y ago

> A more useful/practical question would be: what tools can we build to assist CEOs in their decision making and make them more productive? They are called data scientists. An AI would be able to crunch numbers, but someone needs to read and interpret the results. You can't automate that part yet, humans are still the best in interpreting data into social and business context.

teawrecks 5y ago

Explain why an AGI is needed? Because to me, invoking the need for an AGI sounds equivalent to saying you don't understand the problem space.

fighterpilot 5y ago
The job of a CEO would need AGI because it's the type of job that requires understanding of human social dynamics, market context, regulatory context, etc. Such cross domain multi faceted expertise is the type of thing that needs general and broad intelligence to do effectively. Hire people, fire people, pitch investors, manage direct reports across multiple business lines, understand what's going on in the world and market, set a product vision/direction, shape the culture of the org, etc etc. That's AGI territory.
- niceairport 5y ago
  I have mixed feelings between your response and the response you are replying to. One one hand I can clearly see how what you're saying makes sense. On the other, I still am inclined to believe that if you really distilled the actual purpose of everything you mentioned, it could be formulated in a way that doesn't require AGI.
  - fighterpilot 5y ago
    I think one thing to consider is the non-stationary distributions in the problem space. We may be able to formulate our current understanding of what it takes to be a CEO in every feasible future context that we can imagine, and create an agent (not an AGI) that does that. But then what would happen when the distributions change out of sample in an unforseeable way? Suppose two countries go to war and this drastically changes the operating environment of the business. The agent would need to learn how to operate with human-level capability in this novel environment which it wasn't trained specifically to do. That's why I'm thinking it requires an AGI.