953 replies to this topic

[corb]

 I guess we better start thinking about it, because we've taken control of our own evolution and we seem to be heading in this direction.  It should be interesting.

It has definitely been the inspiration for a lot of science fiction work in the past.
Somehow most of it deals with the extinction of the human race, though .

Quite rightfully so.

 

Personally I prefer the better depiction of the future in sci fi. The one where sure - most types of labour are delegated to machines but people have decided to retain decision making and intellectual work like science and art as human only endeavors.

 

Let's not forget, we make machines to help better ourselves, not for the sake of making machines. If a machine is harmful instead of helpful to human society it should not be made. Or in the case it already exists it should be destroyed.

 

Since we're talking about basic income let me quote Marx on something, I think it applies

 

 

Labor is the self-expression of man, an expression of his individual physical and mental powers. In this process of genuine activity man develops himself, becomes himself; work is not only a means to an end -- the product -- but an end in itself, the meaningful expression of human energy; hence work is enjoyable.

 

Communists had a lot of erroneous ideas, but this one is in fact quite correct.

Work is not something that is forced upon society. Humans enjoy work.

Sports for instance are considered by most people a pastime activity. But it is by most definitions - work.

 

I personally disagree with the notion that it will be useless for people to work in the future. They'd be getting basic income just for being alive either way, right? Well. Why not let them work if they want? It's a free (or a cheap if they get paid something) workforce at that point. Why waste the resource?

[niner]

Personally I prefer the better depiction of the future in sci fi. The one where sure - most types of labour are delegated to machines but people have decided to retain decision making and intellectual work like science and art as human only endeavors.

 

Let's not forget, we make machines to help better ourselves, not for the sake of making machines. If a machine is harmful instead of helpful to human society it should not be made. Or in the case it already exists it should be destroyed.

 

I'm looking forward to a future when more decisions are made by machines, because too many humans are stupid, ideological, mis- or dis-informed, fearful, paranoid, greedy or vindictive.  I'd rather live in a country run by super-intelligent machines than by the idiots presently walking the halls of the US Congress. 

 

So far we haven't managed to destroy the world's trove of nuclear weapons, so I don't expect that we'll be destroying machines that are "too smart".   Maybe if the hyperintelligent machine's decision is that all humans should be killed, then it would be a good idea to destroy it, but I guess that would be too late.

[Danail Bulgaria]

There is one big issue, that I can't understand about the machines taking over the world. A lot of the things, that we are working at the moment don't actually require high power artificial intellect to be replaced. There are already fully automated production lines, that work on electricity, but don't have even electronics, and are entirely mechanical. Certain types of AI are completely harmless in terms of taking over the world, because they can't do something more, that what they are designed to do. For example the self - driving cars can do only that - they self - drive. Why is this necessary for us to produce an AI, that may decide to kill us out.

[corb]

So far we haven't managed to destroy the world's trove of nuclear weapons, so I don't expect that we'll be destroying machines that are "too smart".   Maybe if the hyperintelligent machine's decision is that all humans should be killed, then it would be a good idea to destroy it, but I guess that would be too late.

 

 

I wasn't even talking about AIs just machines that are harmful to society in general. And that includes nuclear weapons.

I don't know why some people think an AI can make decisions that would make them happier or are intrinsically better. An AI is just another person in the end of the day, they would have a personality just like any other intelligence, but no feelings - even if they're not out to destroy the human race they'd probably come up with some very sociopathic ideas, since they'll lack compassion.

 

 

Why is this necessary for us to produce an AI, that may decide to kill us out.

It's not.

We don't need any AI for that matter.

We can have all the robots and machines we need to replace most labour without AI.
 

Edited by corb, 20 December 2014 - 03:56 PM.

[albedo]

A recent (Aug 2014) Pew report might be an interesting read. It summarizes opinions from about 2000 experts on the subject of "AI, Robotics and the Future of Jobs" and is structured with reasons to be hopeful, reasons to be concerned and areas where expert groups agree:

 

http://www.pewintern...cs-and-Jobs.pdf

[corb]

A recent (Aug 2014) Pew report might be an interesting read. It summarizes opinions from about 2000 experts on the subject of "AI, Robotics and the Future of Jobs" and is structured with reasons to be hopeful, reasons to be concerned and areas where expert groups agree:

 

http://www.pewintern...cs-and-Jobs.pdf

 

 

Possibility #3:
We will see a return to uniquely “human” forms of production
Another group of experts anticipates that pushback against expanding automation will lead to a revolution in small-scale, artisanal, and handmade modes of production

 

That's the best case scenario as I already mentioned couple posts back.

 

As far as redefining what a job means, well in Japan there's this thing called "waiting for pension" rooms where people browse the internet and get paid minimal wage because the companies they work for can't legally fire them if they're close to pension but also have no need for their services anymore. Japan being the forefront of automation industries and being in a bit of economic trouble right now, I hope no one is surprised.

I honestly hope we don't have to get to the point where we'll have to redefine what's a "job" like that on a large scale in the future.

 

And lastly I'm glad they share my view that we shape our own future and that if something is detrimental we should inhibit it.

[Danail Bulgaria]

Here I disagree with you, compatriot.

 

uniquely “human” forms of production

means, that from two people, who work one and the same job, one of them does nothing the whole day, and the other works as in hell, they to receive equal payments. This was one of the biggest mistakes in all of the systems, that allowed that, and is one of the biggest mistakes of the systems, which allow this today.

 

The best perspective from the above is:

Possibility #1: We will experience less drudgery and more leisure time
 

[corb]

Here I disagree with you, compatriot.

 

uniquely “human” forms of production

means, that from two people, who work one and the same job, one of them does nothing the whole day, and the other works as in hell, they to receive equal payments. This was one of the biggest mistakes in all of the systems, that allowed that, and is one of the biggest mistakes of the systems, which allow this today.

 

The best perspective from the above is:

Possibility #1: We will experience less drudgery and more leisure time
 

 

Uniquely human means jobs that require a lot of creativity and almost no repetition. Things that are going to be cost inefficient to automate for a long time .

[Danail Bulgaria]

Won't that be only a step towards the machines becoming better in ALL of the jobs?

[mag1]

Robotic transport technology will cause a transformative change in human experience. It goes far beyond the delivery of packages. 

 

Imagine a future in which every good or service that you desire is delivered directly to you (wherever you are).

There will be no need for humans to be put themselves at risk. The volume of such deliveries would be massive. This will surely

be a massive growth industry.

 

It surprises me that some portion of the day has not already been allocated for such deliveries (perhaps 2-4 am).

This would be a good time to test the technology on a large scale under real world conditions.

[Danail Bulgaria]

If the transport gets 100% automatized, then a lot of taxi drivers, bus drivers, truck drivers, train drivers, even pilots will be lost worldwide. The question is what will happen with all these people?

[Lobotomy]

When industry changes, so too must the infrastructure, and vice-versa.

 

Most of you are panicking because this means robots will be replacing animals for menial labor. When this happens en masse, do you really expect the country to stay the same?

 

Slavery and Child Labour, the two major sources of menial labor from in 17th-19th century America, were abolished some 200 years ago. Industry (at least in the north) got along just fine, but not without serious adjustments in employ. The world kept spinning, the sky didn't fall. And who knew that things would actually change for the better as a result of not putting children and minorities at serious bodily risk?

 

I would like to think that this is a near direct translation of every other industrial progression. A new Industrial Revolution, if you will. I also think that some of your conceptions of how future industry is going to work is too sci-fi, and I mean that in a trope-y, cliché way, not technologically. 3D Printing is going to completely dominate production for a good long time. 3D Printers can be bought for the price of a PlayStation, can print themselves, can be upgraded and refitted for new materials and other technologies, such as PCB Printing.  We are going to eliminate material need within 100 years, for sure. When everyone in the world has a replicator, then the only government state left will be the Star Trek-adapted classical idea of Socialism. There is no need, thus no obligation to do anything except what you want thanks to scary, scary technology.

[Danail Bulgaria]

I am not scared from technology taking all of our professions. I am ready to live in any possible situation, as long as I am immortal lol

 

Many things sound sci-fi, but who knows? Some day really for the people may not remain anything for being better than the machine.

 

"Learning is what most adults will do for a living in the 21st century."
    - Lewis Perelman
 

[mag1]

I am scared about the social implications of technology displacing workers.

Progress has resulted in a world in which many people do not have an obvious means of supporting themselves. The socio-politico-economic implications of such a circumstance will likely be revealed during this century. Notably, some European nations already have 50% or greater unemployment rates among their youth. What upheaval might result from 100% youth unemployment?

The advent of robotic transport seems ominous. Transport workers often are highly skilled knowledge workers. Learning how to navigate a complex non-standard grid is equivalent to a university degree. Research has found that such workers acquire substantial changes in their neuro-anatomy. If transport is now a technologically solvable problem, what other occupations might now be near obsolescence? Education will surely have to change due to the online-learning revolution. How will educators compete with free MOOCs? With current genetic technology, what possible illness would require medical attention?

Yet, at the same time, it should be noted that no modern industrial society has ever chosen to return to a past way of life. Consider, how much poorer everyone would be if we chose to life in a subsistence agricultural economy. Every single person would need to struggle day and night just to feed themselves. There would be no spare capacity for anything else. Some places in the world still have such an economic system. In such a system, large disparities of wealth would be difficult to create. Everyone would have a place in society. Virtually no modern person would want to go back to such a world.

The same thinking will likely apply to robotic transport technology. Once the enormous enhancement in convenience and well-bring is experienced, few, if any, would choose to turn back the clock. We will all live a life of luxury. Anything that we want will be delivered to us at almost no expense. This will surely have important implications for the retail sector. Why would a large city need more than a few well situated supermarkets, gas stations etc.? Many cities are designed under the assumption that consumers will walk to the nearest store.

The transition to a high technology form of agricultural production has enormously increased economic welfare of everyone. The transition to a high technology form of transportation will likely also accomplish such a transformation in wealth.

[Danail Bulgaria]

Only the machines to be working, and we doing nothing, but enjoying the goods of the life, seems to be the most acceptable option from the people in this topic.

 

The question is will the humanity be able to achieve it?

 

Another option is holding of the production of everything in the hands of few people, and the rest of the people, including the rest of the people from the production owner's countries to live in misery.

 

The question is will the small part of the humanity, that will be benefited, be able to achieve it?

 

These 2 scenarios are the ultimate 2 arriving points of the machines becoming better than human path. All the other scenarios, that were discussed in the forum are only steps in the path of the scenario of machines becoming better than the human in every aspect.

 

 

 

One of them is the ultimate capitalism, the other the ultimate socialism. Strange fatoms the fate is streaming to us.

Edited by seivtcho, 25 January 2015 - 09:23 PM.

[niner]

Only the machines to be working, and we doing nothing, but enjoying the goods of the life, seems to be the most acceptable option from the people in this topic.

 

 

The people who own the robots will be enjoying life, but what about the displaced workers?  Maybe they will band together to hunt down and kill the wealthy people.  Then they can enjoy life too.  Or maybe they could get jobs as guards for the wealthy.  They could man the machine gun towers at the corners of the rich people's compounds and mow down any poor people who approach.  Probably the guards would be robots, though, because they would be both cheaper and more reliable than humans, and wouldn't turn on their masters.  But some of those displaced workers will be pretty smart, and might figure out ways to get the rich people in a moment of vulnerability.  I think when people are developing future social policy, they ought to think about what kind of world they want to live in.  Bizarre dystopias don't just happen out of the blue.  They need the right conditions to develop.  What kinds of seeds for the future are we planting today?

[Danail Bulgaria]

 

The people who own the robots will be enjoying life, but what about the displaced workers?  Maybe they will band together to hunt down and kill the wealthy people.  Then they can enjoy life too.  ....

 

This is called a revolution, or a social revolution, to be more precise. The interesting thing is, that in the times of extreme social inequality, each lets name him "owner of the ultimate goods" thought, that being killed from the crowd, that lives in poverty and misery is impossible. Further they have been thinking, that they have successfully profilactically killed out all of their eventual opponents. And as the history shows, the revolution always has managed to find a way to destroy them. Another thing, that they have to care about is killing plots from unexpected people, including members of their family. What the future will be? Will this happen again? Or the production owners will manage to find a way to use the superior goods forever? I think, that only the time will show that.
 

"Bizarre dystopias don't just happen out of the blue."

Well, if the machines become better than the humans in EVERY ASPECT the change of the world will be inevitable, and unless you are not somewhat prepared, the changes will happen actually out of the blue. Most probably if you a worker in a factory, you will get fired one day, and for your astonishment, you will see a new machine being mounted on your place.

 

"What kinds of seeds for the future are we planting today?"

Well, the power and the money of the world is continuously concentrated in the hands of big oligarchs. So, I don't know, but it seems, that the ultimate capitalism with a few extremely rich people and equally extreme poverty for the rest of the world is the more likely option. Moreover, the socialistic movements are weak, and the most advanced ideology, that propagates, that the goods have to be equally spread among the population, the such called communism, which is supposed to be the main opponent of the capitalism is on the path to the oblivion.

[Mind]

I hope I am not getting too futuristic here but I suspect that most of us here will join the mass consciousness, the knowledge society, the cyborg collective, to some extent and thus continue to guide the evolution of intelligent life and find meaning for our existence.

 

Wouldn't the displaced, and democrat idiots (niner's terminology) in congress, be invited to join as well? If they didn't want to join, I tend to think the era of abundance would allow for them to live a hedonistic and happy existence of drugs, sex, rock-n-roll, gluttony, and face-ass facebook.

[Danail Bulgaria]

So, we will have to become cyborgs in order to survive. lol Here is a third option.

 

It will be a very difficult question who will be invited to join and which group to join, and in which scenario. Will it be an invitation at all, or will it be a mafia war between the oligarchs? Many people, who think, that will be a certain part of the few, holding the entire production, are simply wrong, independent of their social status or material condition at the moment.

 

As for the usual people, I think, that if they make us immortal, no matter which of the 3 scenarios will happen, even if we live in an extreme poverty, will manage to stabilize our lives, and gradually increase our material status, to some level, that may not be at the level of the ultra - rich production holders, but will eventually become good enough for living well according to today's standarts.

[niner]

Wouldn't the displaced, and democrat idiots (niner's terminology) in congress, be invited to join as well? If they didn't want to join, I tend to think the era of abundance would allow for them to live a hedonistic and happy existence of drugs, sex, rock-n-roll, gluttony, and face-ass facebook.

 

Just for the record, I didn't include a party affiliation with my mention of the idiots in congress.  D's are at least mostly reality-based.  Anti-science and Tea Party R's have mostly but not entirely cornered the market on Congressional idiocy.   The members of Congress are, by and large,  the economic elite.  They will not have to be invited.  They are the ones that invite, to paraphrase Walter White.   I think that in the long run, the era of abundance might solve a lot of these problems.  It's the nearer term that I worry about.  I don't know how long it will take for the era of abundance to happen, but I'm pretty sure the robot/ai takeover will happen first.

[Antonio2014]

Can someone point to some evidence that we are advancing to the first AI birth? I don't see any real progress towards AI in all the history of the field. I do see an exponential increase in number of computations per second, but that's not AI, that's only a faster computer (that must be programmed and can only obey very precise instructions). Nevertheless, I'm not an expert in the field. So can you point out some signals that we are really advancing towards the singularity? If we will get only faster computers and no real AI, we humans will still have lots of jobs.

[niner]

Siri, Watson, Google Search, self-driving cars...  I suppose it could be argued that these are just highly sophisticated expert systems, but it gives you a hint at the direction technology is taking.

Edited by niner, 28 January 2015 - 12:57 AM.

[Antonio2014]

I didn't tried Siri and don't know what Watson is, but certainly Google search is not AI and it's not near it at all. Self-driving cars aren't AI too. Driving is a rather mechanical thing, you don't need intelligence for it. Even bacteria can "self-drive" through their environment.

[mag1]

Humanity is a dying species. 

 

We are witnessing, perhaps for the first time, a widespread decline in human civilization. At the current rate of decline, Russia might not survive beyond this century. 

Many other socialist minded nations also appear to have embraced a philosophy of self-destruction. This nihilism existed through much of the twentieth century, though, at that time, it was accompanied by substantial fertility rates. Substantial fertility rates now exist in almost no industrialized society. One of the only advanced nations to have a fertility rate near replacement is America. It requires no particular clairvoyance to suggest that America might be the last refuge of human civilization. It surprises me how much of an European exodus has already recently occurred here.   

 

I would attribute this malaise to the malevolence and hopelessness that has arisen from our age of technology. It is no longer implausible to suggest that humanity will, relatively soon, be displaced by the technology that we have created. The dismal future that this portends has not encouraged high levels of reproduction. The recent crisis in some European nations highlights the intensifying socioeconomic problems of our times. Callous indifference towards the suffering that many are now feeling will not insulate people from the approaching consequences that we will all have to bear.

 

During much of the last few centuries there has been enormous increases in human populations. This has been an overwhelming benefit for humanity. The totaled sum of all human intelligence (potential) has increased massively. Much of the progress that we have all enjoyed is a result merely of this expansion. The bulk of the wealth of most industrialized societies lies in its real estate. Consider the future in Russia where the population will decrease by almost 1 million citizens per year out as far as the eye can see. From the vantage point of someone from a new world country, such a reality is difficult to contemplate. However, it does not require strenuous concentration to imagine the implications for their real estate market.    

 

If we could all embrace the notion of benevolent self-interest, then we might return to a more adaptive trajectory for humanity. By this I mean finding constructive ways to help others see the positives of this new era of technology. We need to move away from the beggar thy neighbour mentality that has now brought us to the brink of human

extinction.       

[niner]

Well, that sounds pretty gloomy, mag1.  I don't think that exploding human population is doing anyone a lot of good.  All that brainpower goes to waste if it's undernourished and underdeveloped, propagandized and filled with lies.  That's the state of a hell of a lot of human brains.  I hope that we can gradually decrease the population of the earth by a factor of ten.  That will be better for everyone, with more space, resources and wealth to go around, and we would once again be able to have large wilderness areas and animal habitats.

[Danail Bulgaria]

I didn't tried Siri and don't know what Watson is, but certainly Google search is not AI and it's not near it at all. Self-driving cars aren't AI too. Driving is a rather mechanical thing, you don't need intelligence for it. Even bacteria can "self-drive" through their environment.

 

They are not the strong AI my friend, but they still are advanced enough to take jobs. The self-driving cars can fire all taxi drivers, trunk drivers, bus drivers, later the all possible machine drivers, including salesman and pilots.
 

[Elus]

I doubted that actors would be replaced soon, but the level of realism in these videos makes me question that belief. 

 

 

 

Furthermore, Microsoft's recent announcement of the Hololens might replace entire swaths of jobs by allowing people to augment their capabilities with AR and do tasks themselves rather than relying on professionals. Demonstrated here is repairs guided by augmented reality instructions overlayed onto the real world. 

 

 

Edited by Elus, 28 January 2015 - 08:46 PM.

[Antonio2014]

Furthermore, Microsoft's recent announcement of the Hololens might replace entire swaths of jobs by allowing people to augment their capabilities with AR and do tasks themselves rather than relying on professionals. Demonstrated here is repairs guided by augmented reality instructions overlayed onto the real world. 

 

They could start by giving it to their programmers to repair Windows XD

[mag1]

I think my comments about the possible consequences of the collapse of a society spoke directly to the topic of this thread.
Many in America might never have thought of the severe consequences that might result from robotic cars or the singularity event.
Within American society there is almost no collective memory for such an event. In Europe, though, social collapse has been a way of life for centuries. My description of the problems facing Russian society have not been unanticipated by them during the past few decades: Western European levels of fertility, sub-Saharan life expectancy, combined with an increasingly desperate Exodus out of Russia. However, the extent of the decline now occurring in Russia is unprecedented in human history.

Imagine the panic in watching your community being dismantled year by year. Those who think that somehow they might be immune to the same process should consider the process carefully. How much would your house, likely constituting most of your life savings, be worth if your community were to experience demographic collapse? (Probably much less than you might possibly imagine). There are many edge cities in North America that ostensibly have no other economic base than their retail sector. Robotic cars would turn these edge cities into economic moonscape.

[mag1]

My reviews have not been favorable. However, I will press on as being a sugar coating sycophant will not reveal the truth. It is worth noting that futurists have largely agreed that the singularity event will create even more severe social displacement than has been anticipated on this thread regarding the introduction of robotic transport.

Think of the social dislocation that would result from robotic cars. You could google map any major city in the world and randomly zoom into street level. In almost any major city you would likely be within 1 mile from some sort of food store and other retail locations (possibly this would not be true in some car friendly cities especially in America). Now consider what your street level view would look like in a future with robotic transport when much of the retail economy had disappeared.