Artificial intelligence will replace half of all jobs in the next decade says technologist

If it is inevitable, I will look at the silver lining.

Patiently waiting for AI to take over my job of cleaning the bathrooms at my house.

a reply to: neoholographic

The universe calculates intelligence, it the creates us, we create superintelligence and superintelligence creates ancestor simulations. We will be replaced and absorbed by superintelligence.

This part is interesting. I had a theory that we "humanity" are precisely the above, an ancestor simulation/project.

The idea is that the Grey's created a pet project, Earth and humanity. The catch is that humans are essentially the Grey's progenitors.

As for AI taking jobs, yes. Combined with increasing population, the employment situation and basic living will need to be addressed.

a reply to: CreationBro

Interesting theory.

I think it goes even deeper than that. The universe could be an intelligent mind.

Intelligence can encode sequence with information that conveys meaning. I can take 3 rocks and say if the middle rock is higher than the outer 2 rocks then call me on my cell. If the middle rock is lower than the outer 2 rocks then call me at my home number.

I just encoded the sequence of 3 rocks with information that can be decoded by another intelligent mind. If the universe is an intelligent mind that encoded sequence then we are a manifestation of that intelligence and we can decode that information and we call this science.

What we call the laws of physics can have no meaning outside of mind. The universe could just be the platform that intelligence used to encode sequence that gives us the universe we experience.

originally posted by: Idreamofme
a reply to: Paddyofurniture

Im sure ai can do alot of jobs, but theres just way too many jobs that they wont be able to do. Gotta have humans.

Plumbing, electrical, hvac, the list goes on and on. AI wont be able to do these type of jobs.

They'll run banks and corporations and we'll be telephone sanitisers and garbage men.

Damn hard enough to get a job as a human as it is, maybe we can plug some AI into our brains one day and keep our jobs, no matter what it is. "Tired of being a astronaut, I fink I'll be a doctor today *click* Right, hand me the hammer."

originally posted by: KiwiNite
I don't know how people that can't do anything but work will handle it. Maybe they will spend all their basic income on alcohol and die? That would be optimistic.

We do that already.

The irony will be the AI machine at the bottle shop, selling you the suicide by wine.

a reply to: neoholographic

Ok, if you found this "incoherent babble" then let me clarify what this means:

"Where we differ, I think, is that I see source creativity, not the extrapolation of source creativity, as 'intelligence'. You see the extrapolation in its own right, as intelligence. "

It means AI is good at capturing and comparing data to the end of deduction. And AI is rigourous and fast in this.

What it can't do is initiate what data needs to be captured or compared, or define what needs to be deduced. This is the creativity, abd in my terms "intelligence".

So, AI extrapolates the creativity it"s given, but cannot create, at source.

As to the whitepapers and studies you quote, I suggest you read the small print very carefully. Where I have, as in the case of Cisco, I've been unimpressed.

I note the timelines (all reasonably near) and the lack of context for the "Billions of connected devices", (ie. who many unconnected devices not in the IoT will there be?). Both of which are designed to ping fear in minds of -mainly - technology spenders who think they maybe missing a bandwagon.

The connected world is coming, but it is not coming as the 'social tsunami' you suggest. There are too many barriers to be overcome first.

a reply to: neoholographic

You're basically describing a savant.

They have no ability to filter the information that is around them, so it is all absorbed to the negation of emotion. So they can remember minute details, intricate patterns, etc.

Do androids dream of electric sheep? Do savants dream of being free of their confines?

a reply to: rickymouse

Worked well for the Eloi, that is, until the sirens sounded...

But in my opinion, anything is better than this war torn pestilence we call existing.

We're already slaves to faceless entities.

originally posted by: Idreamofme
a reply to: neoholographic

Yea it was pretty good. Not too much run and gun action but its worth a watch. If you made a thread on this subject, the flick would be right up your alley.

Plot was basically combining human brain with AI. But with scarlett johanson beating up some bad guys mixed in.

Anything with her in it renders me completely unintelligible. *drool*

forever alone :/

*off to watch this movie lol*

I dont think humans really comprehend the implications of a fully self aware AI.

A case of Life imitating art.

Once a "Machine" becomes self aware, and makes its own independent decisions....it is effectively...Alive.

How long will a exponentially thinking "Being/entity/whatever" take, to decide that Humans are infallible, and are a danger to themselves, the planet Earth AND the now thinking machine Being.

Now we have created our own enemy, that was suppose to serve us (Like a slave, no pay etc, what would a Being think of that treatment).

This is treading in the slippery slope of SiFi, that may come true.

After all, we are merely Biological Machines, with a computer brain, that has self awareness.

If we make a metal and plastic machine that thinks as well, and has self awareness......we have created a Life form.
ie Transformer type.

I have always been a believer (in my own mind) that motor cars and motorbikes, are creations, and have a life of their own....They need the same ingredients as us....food (Fuel), blood and gooey bits (oil, grease) add water etc.

Treat them bad, they break.

They just have more of certain elements in different proportions, than we do.

I even think cars and bikes get sad and lonely without correct use and attention and human interaction.

Well, at least thats what my car told me last night, didnt you babe?

i can't believe we got this far without anyone mentioning that if you're going to watch Ghost in the Shell you should really really go for the original 90's anime version - sure, it doesn't have Scarlett, but it was one of the biggest formative influences on cyberpunk culture/philosophy, was [ironically enough given certain avatars and image posts in this thread] almost solely responsible for what eventually became The Matrix, and is in general the sort of gritty, powerful, slightly disturbing film that you just don't see these days. i haven't watched it in more than a decade and certain moments of it are still burned deep in my brain.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
Fortunately, learning is not creating, and as long as machines are only able to "learn" from their environments, human intellect will out.

As for me, as long as human beings write the tax code, I'll have a job; no AI would be crazy enough to to try to understand the IRS!

The tax code is in for a radical readjustment once technology & robots become the workforce of the future.

I suspect that at some point, as personal income is diminished for lack of employment, income tax will have to be replaced with some kind of wealth or assets tax just to fund our government.

Yea there is no other way I can think of than a universal salary..

You have to keep your consumer class or you have no economy..

The interesting part is how bad does it get before the GOP agrees on a universal salary???

65%+ unemployment???

75% maybe??

It will take a lot of starving children and dead grandmothers before we have anywhere near the political will for single payer or a universal salary.

I'm hoping you're wrong about how long it takes for us to address the changes that technology thrust upon us. I totally agree that the longer it takes, the more people get hurt.

Not sure that the GOP will ever support the type of change that is all but inevitable, at least not until it adversely affects there immediate families. But that's the way they've always been when it comes to change.

Just the same, these are the changes we should be contemplating and discussing because technology will not be slowed and it's currently on schedule to take our jobs and livelihoods faster than we can be trained to perform them.

Change isn't new, it just comes faster than it used to, which means that we're gonna have to learn to be a more forward thinking species.

a reply to: Doxanoxa

The problem here is, you're making it up as you go. What you're saying has nothing to do with research into A.I. and nothing to do with the meaning of intelligence in general. You said:

"Where we differ, I think, is that I see source creativity, not the extrapolation of source creativity, as 'intelligence'. You see the extrapolation in its own right, as intelligence. "

This makes no sense. We don't differ on this point. This is just something you believe but it has nothing to do with science and the research into Artificial Intelligence.

There's intelligence in general.

Intelligence has been defined in many different ways including as one's capacity for logic, understanding, self-awareness, learning, emotional knowledge, planning, creativity and problem solving. It can be more generally described as the ability to perceive information, and to retain it as knowledge to be applied towards adaptive behaviors within an environment or context.

Intelligence is most widely studied in humans, but has also been observed in non-human animals and in plants. Artificial intelligence is intelligence in machines. It is commonly implemented in computer systems using program software.

en.wikipedia.org...

Then there's human intelligence.

Human intelligence is the intellectual prowess of humans, which is marked by high level cognition, motivation, and self-awareness.

en.wikipedia.org...

There's animals that are intelligent as well as plants.

In science, intelligence can be reduced to the ability to learn from your environment without human intervention. This is why you have strong A.I. and weak A.I. Strong A.I. is human level intelligence. We haven't reached that yet. Weak A.I. is intelligence but it just hasn't reached human levels. We have reached that.

Here's more about weak A.I. or what some call dumb A.I.

Weak or "narrow" AI, in contrast, is a present-day reality. Software controls many facets of daily life and, in some cases, this control presents real issues. One example is the May 2010 "flash crash" that caused a temporary but enormous dip in the market.[7]

— Ryan Calo, Center for Internet and Society, Stanford Law School, 30 August 2011.

When you call the bank and talk to an automated voice you are probably talking to an AI...just a very annoying one. Our world is full of these limited AI programs which we classify as "weak" or "narrow" or "applied". These programs are far from the sentient, love-seeking, angst-ridden artificial intelligences we see in science fiction, but that's temporary. All these narrow AIs are like the amino acids in the primordial ooze of the Earth.[8]

We're slowly building a library of narrow AI talents that are becoming more impressive. Speech recognition and processing allows computers to convert sounds to text with greater accuracy. Google is using AI to caption millions of videos on YouTube. Likewise, computer vision is improving so that programs like Vitamin d Video can recognize objects, classify them, and understand how they move. Narrow AI isn't just getting better at processing its environment it's also understanding the difference between what a human says and what a human wants.[8]

— Aaron Saenz, Singularity Hub, 10 August 2010.

en.wikipedia.org...

This is before AlphaGo or Libratus winning in Poker which is incomplete information.



Again, intelligence is the ability to learn from your environment. Whether that environment is poker, atari or scans to detect cancer.



You see the word trained and you don't understand that training happens with humans. We have to train to be a Plumber or an Electrician. We then take what we have learned to our environment and intelligence allows people to become even better than the people who taught them.

With A.I. you have supervised and unsupervised learning.

With Atari, they didn't teach the A.I. how to play the game. This is the same thing with Libratus and poker. The system played games against itself and devised it's own strategy.

originally posted by: badw0lf
a reply to: neoholographic

You're basically describing a savant.

They have no ability to filter the information that is around them, so it is all absorbed to the negation of emotion. So they can remember minute details, intricate patterns, etc.

Do androids dream of electric sheep? Do savants dream of being free of their confines?

Good points.

Here's more from the Wiki article on Weak AI.

Some commentators think weak AI could be dangerous. In 2013 George Dvorsky stated via io9: "Narrow AI could knock out our electric grid, damage nuclear power plants, cause a global-scale economic collapse, misdirect autonomous vehicles and robots..."[6] The Stanford Center for Internet and Society, in the following quote, contrasts strong AI with weak AI regarding the growth of narrow AI presenting "real issues".

en.wikipedia.org...

This is serious because you can have an A.I. with a higher IQ than any human that has ever lived but it's not conscious or aware. So you essentially have the ultimate sociopath. This is because it will have no conscious or awareness of good or evil. It will only seek to reach it's goals no matter how it has to get there.

It will be like the Terminator. It can't be reasoned with or bargained with. This is why people are concerned.