4 ms·

- You're citing a document from 2010, when IBM Watson hadn't beaten humans on Jeopardy, Google driverless car wasn't demonstrated, Boston Dynamics big-dog, atla

by fizixer 12y ago

- You're citing a document from 2010, when IBM Watson hadn't beaten humans on Jeopardy, Google driverless car wasn't demonstrated, Boston Dynamics big-dog, atlas hadn't happened, DARPA robotics competition hadn't happened, quadrocopters weren't doing crazy things, Amazon kiva systems, Baxter, etc, etc. Things are picking up pace. (EDIT: hadn't happened or not widely known). - Since then, Paul Krugman himself has covered tech-unemployment in at least one of his blog posts, in which he has expressed surprise at how things are changing but has concluded the post in humor and essentially dismissing the idea (not very wise!). - Politicians lag behind economists in staying up to date, who themselves lag behind technologists. "This time" it would really help if economists try to wake up. - CGPGrey's youtube video 'Humans need not apply' is a must watch for anyone serious about staying aware of upcoming technology. - The accusation of lump-of-labor fallacy is itself a strawman fallacy. Tech-unemployment doesn't require labor to be fixed. It can happen even if labor lump is increasing but not as fast as humans are becoming obsolete, i.e., "this time". - Side-comment: Adaptation almost always happens because of new-entrants (youth learning new trades) so it's a generational thing. Those thrown out of the job market are more likely to retire early or something like that. And "this time", even youth are not going to adapt. - Side-comment 2: Recessions cause quite a bit of damage to social structures which intentionally or unintentionally doesn't get media coverage, or at least doesn't register in public's minds. Just the recent European recession caused suicide in the millions (I came across this article recently but can't find it ATM). - I've put "this time" multiple times. I have to admit it's a claim without scientific evidence, but circumstantial evidence combined with conversation with technologists who agree what is possible in principle, really is a strong indication. Brain emulation has nowhere to go but in the direction of "a solved problem". The estimated time frame is 10 to 15 years.

maxharris 12y ago
I found 'Humans need not apply' utterly unconvincing. For instance, the example cited regarding computer-generated music that was supposed to prove that computers could write great music. But the computer-generated music that was featured in the video sounded obviously like computer-generated music, and not something that I would ever listen to.
- ivanca 12y ago
  The irony there is that music is going downhill anyways, without needing to be automatized, because now you buy songs instead of albums/discs or just listen to them using youtube or some free streaming service. Plus there may be a finite number of songs -distinguishable by the human hear- than can be created. Plus, single examples are low-hanging fruit, you need to attack the main reasoning or just assert plausibility.
  - Ma8ee 12y ago
    It's more great music produced now than ever in history, and it is cheap and accessible for everyone. We are many orders of magnitude before we are even starting to approach the limitations of what humans can distinguish.
    - ivanca 12y ago
      Really, "more great than ever in history"? Tell me one single group that is better than Queen, one single singer better than Syd Barrett, one single song better than Stairway to Heaven. I believe there is good music out there, but saying "more great than ever in history" is just plain false.
      - Ma8ee 12y ago
        And most people are stuck in the same music they listened to during their formative years and will always consider everything done after that garbage. Consequently, for you there will never be anything better than those groups, and if I suggested anything made today you would find it incomprehensible that anyone could think that music better than your icons.
  - CalRobert 12y ago
    Not sure about you but my experience is that my life is full of more amazing music than it ever has been before.
- fivedogit 12y ago
chippy 12y ago
>You're citing a document from 2010... Things are picking up pace That's only 4 years ago. Thing's haven't changed much, it's a human perception problem. Its a misconception that we believe that the time they are living in, right now, is the most important time of all time. Why? Because it's the present and we cannot see the future, and we do not care about the past. The thing to remember is that we have always thought this! In the 1970's they thought that we were living in the most important time ever, and that things were picking up pace. In 1980s we thought the same, in the 1990's we said the exact same thing. pick any year and humans would say the same, "we are living in special times".
- coldtea 12y ago
  >In the 1970's they thought that we were living in the most important time ever, and that things were picking up pace. In 1980s we thought the same, in the 1990's we said the exact same thing. pick any year and humans would say the same, "we are living in special times". Actually no. Most of the millenia of human history have been repeatitive and slow moving. Most people in history lived in exactly the same material conditions, and general culture, as their parents and grandparents. This is something quantifiable, in productivity, in number of inventions, in being able to do extremely important things for the first time in human history (electricity and artificial light, urbanization, nuclear power, flying, space exploration, tele-communications, computing, medicine and biology, etc). All those things are totally unlike the 16th or the 9th century, and they have been picking up pace since the industrial revolution. And the 70's to today (50 years) is not that much in the course of human history. Not even the whole 20th century is. So it's not like those were district periods that "got it wrong", all those decades belong to the same historical period, and were indeed "special times".
  - chippy 12y ago
    you are comparing the past with the present. Which is exactly my point. If you were in the past, you would think that you were in the most exciting times. You wouldn't know about the future. You would never say "oh, in 30 years time will be the most important time". It's a human failing, we always think that right now is the most important. We can compare now with the past. But whenever you are in a now, you will always think it's the most important time. So. We have to remember that everyone always thinks that their now is the most important, and we have to remember this when we think about what the future will be like. Basically what I am saying is that we need perspective, but that humans are naturally biased to whatever moment they are living in.

by fizixer 12y ago

maxharris 12y ago

I found 'Humans need not apply' utterly unconvincing. For instance, the example cited regarding computer-generated music that was supposed to prove that computers could write great music. But the computer-generated music that was featured in the video sounded obviously like computer-generated music, and not something that I would ever listen to.

ivanca 12y ago
The irony there is that music is going downhill anyways, without needing to be automatized, because now you buy songs instead of albums/discs or just listen to them using youtube or some free streaming service. Plus there may be a finite number of songs -distinguishable by the human hear- than can be created. Plus, single examples are low-hanging fruit, you need to attack the main reasoning or just assert plausibility.
- Ma8ee 12y ago
  It's more great music produced now than ever in history, and it is cheap and accessible for everyone. We are many orders of magnitude before we are even starting to approach the limitations of what humans can distinguish.
  - ivanca 12y ago
    Really, "more great than ever in history"? Tell me one single group that is better than Queen, one single singer better than Syd Barrett, one single song better than Stairway to Heaven. I believe there is good music out there, but saying "more great than ever in history" is just plain false.
    - Ma8ee 12y ago
      And most people are stuck in the same music they listened to during their formative years and will always consider everything done after that garbage. Consequently, for you there will never be anything better than those groups, and if I suggested anything made today you would find it incomprehensible that anyone could think that music better than your icons.
- CalRobert 12y ago
  Not sure about you but my experience is that my life is full of more amazing music than it ever has been before.
fivedogit 12y ago

chippy 12y ago

>You're citing a document from 2010... Things are picking up pace That's only 4 years ago. Thing's haven't changed much, it's a human perception problem. Its a misconception that we believe that the time they are living in, right now, is the most important time of all time. Why? Because it's the present and we cannot see the future, and we do not care about the past. The thing to remember is that we have always thought this! In the 1970's they thought that we were living in the most important time ever, and that things were picking up pace. In 1980s we thought the same, in the 1990's we said the exact same thing. pick any year and humans would say the same, "we are living in special times".

coldtea 12y ago
>In the 1970's they thought that we were living in the most important time ever, and that things were picking up pace. In 1980s we thought the same, in the 1990's we said the exact same thing. pick any year and humans would say the same, "we are living in special times". Actually no. Most of the millenia of human history have been repeatitive and slow moving. Most people in history lived in exactly the same material conditions, and general culture, as their parents and grandparents. This is something quantifiable, in productivity, in number of inventions, in being able to do extremely important things for the first time in human history (electricity and artificial light, urbanization, nuclear power, flying, space exploration, tele-communications, computing, medicine and biology, etc). All those things are totally unlike the 16th or the 9th century, and they have been picking up pace since the industrial revolution. And the 70's to today (50 years) is not that much in the course of human history. Not even the whole 20th century is. So it's not like those were district periods that "got it wrong", all those decades belong to the same historical period, and were indeed "special times".
- chippy 12y ago
  you are comparing the past with the present. Which is exactly my point. If you were in the past, you would think that you were in the most exciting times. You wouldn't know about the future. You would never say "oh, in 30 years time will be the most important time". It's a human failing, we always think that right now is the most important. We can compare now with the past. But whenever you are in a now, you will always think it's the most important time. So. We have to remember that everyone always thinks that their now is the most important, and we have to remember this when we think about what the future will be like. Basically what I am saying is that we need perspective, but that humans are naturally biased to whatever moment they are living in.