5 ms·

The point isn't that there'll be no jobs, because ten jobs building a hundred widgets an hour can be replaced by ten jobs maintaining a hundred robots that buil

by hugh3 15y ago

The point isn't that there'll be no jobs, because ten jobs building a hundred widgets an hour can be replaced by ten jobs maintaining a hundred robots that build ten thousand widgets per hour, thus making everybody significantly richer. The real problem is that increasing automation only creates jobs for smart people, while destroying jobs for dumb people. Not everybody capable of building widgets is capable of maintaining a widget-building robot. We're replacing manual labour jobs with jobs that require a brain, but half the population still has below-average intelligence.

rkalla 15y ago
Good point, but does it have a conclusion? I think Kurzweil refers to it as the Singularity... but basically what happens when AI reaches the point where it can manage itself or advance itself? This is certainly in the realm of "what if" because we haven't established if sheer compute power CAN get us AI that eventually becomes self-aware. I sort of assume it can, but I don't like to make sweeping statements based on my assumptions. We might find some missing "human" link in the intelligence chain that stops computers and AIs from making that final leap once we get to that precipice.
- zacharypinter 15y ago
  Here's an interesting article on that: http://hplusmagazine.com/2011/07/26/hear-that-its-the-singularity-coming/ http://hplusmagazine.com/2011/07/26/hear-that-its-the-singul... "A common misnomer about the Singularity and the idea of greater-than-human AI is that it will involve a conscious, self-reflective, and even morally accountable agent. This has led some people to believe that it will have deep and profound thoughts, quote Satre, and resultantly act in a quasi-human manner. This will not be the case. We are not talking about artificial consciousness or even human-like cognition. Rather, we are talking about super-expert systems that are capable of executing tasks that exceed human capacities. It will stem from a multiplicity of systems that are individually singular in purpose, or at the very least, very limited in terms of functional scope. And in virtually all cases, these systems won’t reflect on the consequences of their actions unless they are programmed to do so."
- sliverstorm 15y ago
  I figure we will either: A: Be eliminated by our robot masters B: Be kept around by our robot masters/colleagues because we are useful/equal C: Have already integrated the machines into ourselves, or integrated ourselves into the machines D: Laze about doing nothing of consequence, because robots do everything for us, and aren't self-aware enough to care I'm rooting for C, with B as my fallback.
zacharypinter 15y ago
For some extra dialog, this was touched on in the latest Planet Money podcast: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/07/29/138818388/the-friday-podcast-planet-money-live http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/07/29/138818388/the-frid...
georgemcbay 15y ago
You're still stuck in the thinking that hackinthebochs is saying we have to get away from, just one level deeper. If we have robots that can make widgets, how much longer from that until there are robots that are maintaining the other robots? Robots that are DESIGNING the next generation of robots? The intelligence line which measures who can be replaced by automation is steadily rising and eventually (within our lifetimes, if you believe the singularity nutters -- I think they are wildly optimistic) it'll be higher than all of us. The riots will start a long time before then in either case.
- niklas_a 15y ago
  The important thing to remember is that we have always been afraid of jobs disappearing due to machines. Textile workers in France in the 18th century were afraid to be replaced by automated spinning machines. Switchboard operators got mad when then the automated switchboards arrived. New jobs keep appearing as we gain more wealth, who would have predicted jobs such as web designer or WoW gold farmer 20 years ago? Just like the western world has moved to automated production, China will be able to do the same.

by hugh3 15y ago

rkalla 15y ago

Good point, but does it have a conclusion? I think Kurzweil refers to it as the Singularity... but basically what happens when AI reaches the point where it can manage itself or advance itself? This is certainly in the realm of "what if" because we haven't established if sheer compute power CAN get us AI that eventually becomes self-aware. I sort of assume it can, but I don't like to make sweeping statements based on my assumptions. We might find some missing "human" link in the intelligence chain that stops computers and AIs from making that final leap once we get to that precipice.

zacharypinter 15y ago
Here's an interesting article on that: http://hplusmagazine.com/2011/07/26/hear-that-its-the-singularity-coming/ http://hplusmagazine.com/2011/07/26/hear-that-its-the-singul... "A common misnomer about the Singularity and the idea of greater-than-human AI is that it will involve a conscious, self-reflective, and even morally accountable agent. This has led some people to believe that it will have deep and profound thoughts, quote Satre, and resultantly act in a quasi-human manner. This will not be the case. We are not talking about artificial consciousness or even human-like cognition. Rather, we are talking about super-expert systems that are capable of executing tasks that exceed human capacities. It will stem from a multiplicity of systems that are individually singular in purpose, or at the very least, very limited in terms of functional scope. And in virtually all cases, these systems won’t reflect on the consequences of their actions unless they are programmed to do so."
sliverstorm 15y ago
I figure we will either: A: Be eliminated by our robot masters B: Be kept around by our robot masters/colleagues because we are useful/equal C: Have already integrated the machines into ourselves, or integrated ourselves into the machines D: Laze about doing nothing of consequence, because robots do everything for us, and aren't self-aware enough to care I'm rooting for C, with B as my fallback.

zacharypinter 15y ago

For some extra dialog, this was touched on in the latest Planet Money podcast: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/07/29/138818388/the-friday-podcast-planet-money-live http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/07/29/138818388/the-frid...

georgemcbay 15y ago

You're still stuck in the thinking that hackinthebochs is saying we have to get away from, just one level deeper. If we have robots that can make widgets, how much longer from that until there are robots that are maintaining the other robots? Robots that are DESIGNING the next generation of robots? The intelligence line which measures who can be replaced by automation is steadily rising and eventually (within our lifetimes, if you believe the singularity nutters -- I think they are wildly optimistic) it'll be higher than all of us. The riots will start a long time before then in either case.

niklas_a 15y ago
The important thing to remember is that we have always been afraid of jobs disappearing due to machines. Textile workers in France in the 18th century were afraid to be replaced by automated spinning machines. Switchboard operators got mad when then the automated switchboards arrived. New jobs keep appearing as we gain more wealth, who would have predicted jobs such as web designer or WoW gold farmer 20 years ago? Just like the western world has moved to automated production, China will be able to do the same.