Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The Automation Bomb
Topic Started: Aug 12 2016, 09:10 AM (1,666 Views)
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
This thread about the possible obsolescence of humanity has become a fine argument for why we are here and need to be.

Humbled am I.
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Moonbat
Member Avatar
Pisa-Carp
Quote:
 
Chances are that the amebas will have evolved into a large set of species that include some that can build computers or reason about the intelligence of amebas.


That's very hard to know. Like life itself maybe intelligent is very likely but maybe it's very unlikely. With our sample size of one it's pretty hard to make any conclusions. But I think you can reasonably say there is an evolutionary path that could take an amoeba to intelligent organisms whether or not it's likely we don't know.

Quote:
 
And that "evolve and adapt" is something we have basically no clue how to do in a computer. There are things like "genetic algorithms" or "evolutionary computing", but they are quite different. There are no programs that can mutate other programs in such a way that these programs are "smarter" and can do something entirely new.


I thought genetic programming did that, many things have been designed in such a way clock circuits that work despite looking like they do nothing, those beautiful walking machines that look like animals, etc. etc.

Quote:
 
If we could, we would only need the computational equivalent of the ameba, improve it by a few million generations (which presumably wouldn't take long), and witness the AI singularity a couple of hours later.


You can simulate organisms but you have constraints because you have a limited amount computer power which means your simulated organisms can't grow arbitrarily complex or if you allow them to then the time between successive generations will get longer and longer. People have been doing things like that in the artificial life field for a few decades now. But yeah they are limited by computer power.

I don't see where this leads though I mean if your definition of the intelligence of a replicator includes the intelligence of any possible future progeny given any possible environment then you'll probably end up assigning maximum intelligence to anything and everything. As in if we are really allowed to pick from all possible environments then there will be a path that could turn a flame into an intelligent organism. Which would then make oxidation an intelligent process. One might as well say a computer is as intelligent as all possible programs that could ever run on it.

In any case I don't really see how it relates to whether statistical learning algorithms are likely to put lots of people out of work in the coming decades.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KlavierBauer
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Really enjoying this discussion so far.
I have a lot of ideas about this - some from experience as a developer and in being part of automation (though not in the manufacturing scale), and some just as a science/physics hobbyist who dreamily listens to hours and hours of debates with Dawkins and Krauss, and the musings of Kaku and Kurtzweil.

I don't know that I can wax as intellectually as you guys, certainly not from my phone, but I'm enjoying it immensely - thank you.
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper
"He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
brenda
Member Avatar
..............
Moonbat, thanks for sharing your background a bit more. Makes me want to give you a mom hug. :hug:
“Weeds are flowers, too, once you get to know them.”
~A.A. Milne
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Moonbat, if you're wanting to have an orgasm, try a......



girl.
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
If this helps you...

This is a girl:
Posted Image


This is not:
Posted Image
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Klaus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Moonbat
Aug 13 2016, 02:52 PM
Quote:
 
And that "evolve and adapt" is something we have basically no clue how to do in a computer. There are things like "genetic algorithms" or "evolutionary computing", but they are quite different. There are no programs that can mutate other programs in such a way that these programs are "smarter" and can do something entirely new.


I thought genetic programming did that, many things have been designed in such a way clock circuits that work despite looking like they do nothing, those beautiful walking machines that look like animals, etc. etc.
The thing that genetic algorithms "evolve" is usually just flat data and not something program-like. From what I understand, genetic algorithms have become quite unfashionable because they are just a very coarse heuristic with no guarantees.

Quote:
 
I don't see where this leads though I mean if your definition of the intelligence of a replicator includes the intelligence of any possible future progeny given any possible environment then you'll probably end up assigning maximum intelligence to anything and everything. As in if we are really allowed to pick from all possible environments then there will be a path that could turn a flame into an intelligent organism. Which would then make oxidation an intelligent process. One might as well say a computer is as intelligent as all possible programs that could ever run on it.

Fair point. I guess I'm talking about the intelligence of biological life as it has occurred on earth as a whole, not about a particular species or life form.

But I think your analogy in the last sentence of my quote is not accurate. Computers have no way of coming up with a particular "possible program" on their own. Biological life with its evolution mechanism has. That's the essential difference.

Quote:
 
In any case I don't really see how it relates to whether statistical learning algorithms are likely to put lots of people out of work in the coming decades.

More automation hasn't led to very high unemployment rates in the past. There is no reason to assume that it will have that effect in the future, unless we assume some kind of singularity like human-level AI.
Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Klaus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Larry
Aug 14 2016, 05:35 AM
This is a girl:
Posted Image
That's actually closer to a Photoshop fantasy than to a girl.

This is a girl.
Posted Image
Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Klaus, your idea of what a girl is scares me..... lol
Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve Miller
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
Klaus
Aug 14 2016, 11:06 AM
More automation hasn't led to very high unemployment rates in the past. There is no reason to assume that it will have that effect in the future, unless we assume some kind of singularity like human-level AI.
Depends on the industry. Farming in particular was hard hit with the advent of mechanization and now again with automation. Watch a GPS guided tractor towing an 80' wide electronically controlled sprayer/drill/planter/fertilizer and you'll see what I mean. Drones are taking the place of even more farm work jobs - no reason to drive around and check stuff.

Material handling will be next - automated order picking, packing, stocking - all are in use to day and the technology gets cheaper by the day thanks to companies like Amazon. This is a huge driver of the low skill economy.

Driverless cars = driverless trucks at some point. Self checkout at markets is still in its infancy but promises to replace most checkout employees in 20 years. I've seen giant 3D printers that print out houses in 1 day. Crude yet, but better every day.

I'll be dead before it becomes a huge issue but I'm quite certain it will be as time goes on.
Wag more
Bark less
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikhailoh
Member Avatar
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
Larry, you presented a drastic choice. There is middle ground if they can get the bugs worked out.


Posted Image
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve Miller
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
Squirrel!
Wag more
Bark less
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
George K
Member Avatar
Finally
Steve Miller
Aug 14 2016, 05:37 PM
Squirrel!
Possum!
A guide to GKSR: Click

"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... "
- Mik, 6/14/08


Nothing is as effective as homeopathy.

I'd rather listen to an hour of Abba than an hour of The Beatles.
- Klaus, 4/29/18
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve Miller
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
George K
Aug 14 2016, 05:43 PM
Steve Miller
Aug 14 2016, 05:37 PM
Squirrel!
Possum!
Pie!
Wag more
Bark less
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rainman
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
:confused: boobs?? :shrug:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KlavierBauer
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Steve, I tend to agree but I don't see it necessarily as a bad thing.
Driverless cars and driverless trucks have already happened - and I believe it will take off as a necessity from a safety and efficiency standpoint, not to mention the ecological benefits.
There are already a couple larger-scale tests with autonomous trucks going on in Europe. Most of my Swiss family are in the trucking industry, so I'd be interested to know their thoughts on it, but I think it will be a good shift.
It may be a bit of a Star Trek dream, but I don't think it's wrong for our goal as a species to be the abolition of *most* jobs, resulting in the emancipation of mankind.

It may all go downhill, but I tend to think we will continue to progress and find ways over the hurdles that will present themselves.

I mean, we're not even going to see First Contact until after we reach warp capabilities, so we've gotta get a move on. 🤒
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper
"He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve Miller
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
It might be good, it might be bad. Certainly freeing mankind from the drugery of mindless jobs is a good thing. The question is what will happen to the broad swath of the population who are capable of little else.
Edited by Steve Miller, Aug 14 2016, 08:06 PM.
Wag more
Bark less
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KlavierBauer
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Yeah, I think that's one of the major hurdles for sure.
I personally like Mazlow's approach (not that he had much opinion on autonomous trucking), in believing that when humans' basic needs are taken care of, they rose to greater things.
It would be a big transition for sure, but this stuff won't happen over night.

There will always be someone like me who absolutely demands to be able to drag a knee up a mountain canyon on some dirty 4-stroke horsepower.
:)
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper
"He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rainman
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Quote:
 
Klavierbauer:
It may be a bit of a Star Trek dream, but I don't think it's wrong for our goal as a species to be the abolition of *most* jobs, resulting in the emancipation of mankind.

What does that mean? Emancipated. . . from what, and then to what end??
hmmm...The "goal" of our species is to lay prostate, eating grapes, drinking wine, while innovation eliminates effort? (plus Larry's sexy photos, of course).

I do not agree with the blind acceptance and benefits of driverless cars, for example cars that can even now park without (6X dumb unskilled human) attempts.

At each level of technology proudly replacing human skills, more is lost than the mere task at hand.

The loss of skills, replaced by technology, has an effect.
--- Let me repeat, The loss of skills, replaced by technology, has an effect.
Perhaps not measurable yet, but nonetheless, important.

Not arguing, just responding to how your post struck me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve Miller
Member Avatar
Bull-Carp
KlavierBauer
Aug 14 2016, 08:29 PM
I personally like Mazlow's approach (not that he had much opinion on autonomous trucking), in believing that when humans' basic needs are taken care of, they rose to greater things.
I've come to the conclusion that Maslow was wrong.

American social policy provides for all of Maslow's basic needs but at the same time generates all manner of problems with drugs, gangs, illegitimate children, racism, and extreme religious convictions. It's become obvious that people need work - meaningful work - to lead productive, satisfying lives and to provide guidance for their offspring. Simple provision of basic necessities generates more problems than it solves.

That's where the automation bomb comes in. 50% of the population has a below average IQ by definition. The jobs that automation are eliminating affect the <50% disproportionately and no combination of benefits is going to take the place of meaningful work for those who are not capable of participating in the information economy.

I see this as a problem. This < 50% represents some 50% of the population and to design social policy as though they do not exist is a recipe for disaster. We are seeing this with the rise of the Trump candidacy today, and we can all be thankful that his candidacy isn't going anywhere. Next time we may not be so lucky.

Time now to figure out where to go from here. In all fairness, Ms. Clinton isn't addressing this issue either.

The issue is out there, it's real, and at some point we are going to have to address it

I highly recommend Mr. Ford's book if you are interested in these things.

Wag more
Bark less
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KlavierBauer
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Rainman: no worries, I didn't take your comment as anything but conversation - no need to apologize. :)
I think humans have evolved an amazing brain, capable of doing even more amazing things than it already does when its resources aren't consumed with provision.
I may be wrong, of course, but I think that the future of mankind will be in new skills, in cooperation, in unity, and common goals.
I think that unsustainable, acquisition based models of existence have gotten us where we are, but I also think we can do better, and will have to do better.
I believe that reward has generated great innovation, as has fear (hell, it got us to the moon) - but I think there are other ways we can exist that may be better. Granted, I'm talking centuries down the line, but when I say "emancipation," I'm talking about freeing ourselves from the current treadmill of existence.

Steve:
I don't agree that Maslow's hierarchy is provided completely here in the U.S.
Yes, for the most part the bottom tier are provided for most (food, water, shelter), but our biggest issues as a society occur where the second and third tier don't exist (safety/security, relationships/intimacy).

We tend to attribute self actialization exclusively to hard work and will, but I think it's a natural human state when other things exist. Hard work can achieve those "tiers," but I don't think it's the only way.
Again, I may be wrong about all of this - just the stuff I sit and think about.
"I realize you want him to touch you all over and give you babies, but his handling of the PR side really did screw the pooch." - Ivory Thumper
"He said sleepily: "Don't worry mom, my dick is like hot logs in the morning." - Apple

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Larry
Member Avatar
Mmmmmmm, pie!
Steve Miller
Aug 14 2016, 09:07 PM
KlavierBauer
Aug 14 2016, 08:29 PM
I personally like Mazlow's approach (not that he had much opinion on autonomous trucking), in believing that when humans' basic needs are taken care of, they rose to greater things.
I've come to the conclusion that Maslow was wrong.

American social policy provides for all of Maslow's basic needs but at the same time generates all manner of problems with drugs, gangs, illegitimate children, racism, and extreme religious convictions. It's become obvious that people need work - meaningful work - to lead productive, satisfying lives and to provide guidance for their offspring. Simple provision of basic necessities generates more problems than it solves.

That's where the automation bomb comes in. 50% of the population has a below average IQ by definition. The jobs that automation are eliminating affect the <50% disproportionately and no combination of benefits is going to take the place of meaningful work for those who are not capable of participating in the information economy.

I see this as a problem. This < 50% represents some 50% of the population and to design social policy as though they do not exist is a recipe for disaster. We are seeing this with the rise of the Trump candidacy today, and we can all be thankful that his candidacy isn't going anywhere. Next time we may not be so lucky.

Time now to figure out where to go from here. In all fairness, Ms. Clinton isn't addressing this issue either.

The issue is out there, it's real, and at some point we are going to have to address it

I highly recommend Mr. Ford's book if you are interested in these things.

You know what just floors me, Steve? That you wrote that, and you don't even see how disgustingly condescending you come across. It's like you see yourself sitting high up on a perch looking down on the "dumb little Trump voters and other riff raff" of this world.

The other thing that floors me is how you are able to say "Simple provision of basic necessities generates more problems than it solves" all while being so utterly unaware that with that single statement you just gave the very argument that Conseratives have been making for DECADES, an argument that you as a democrat mock and ridicule.

What's even worse is the way you stupidly equated IQ with education, and from your little perch where you think you are sitting high above half the population, you assume that everyone who works in a repetitive job is not only stupider than you are, but will always work in that type of job - when just a few days ago some of the brightest people here told of their stints at factory jobs.

And it really pisses me off when a liberal (most liberals are just like you in this regard - you think you're intellectually superior) portray Trump supporters as being of low IQ. You're supporting Hillary Clinton, and you supported Obama - I don't think you're in any position to question anyones' IQ, sport.

And people wonder why I can't stand liberals. Jesus, your post was the most ignorant, disgusting pile of steaming horse sh!t I've read all day.

Of the Pokatwat Tribe

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Klaus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
There are quite a few jobs that do not require a lot of education or intelligence but are still not very threatened by automation. Haircutters, for instance, Or prostitution.
Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Klaus
Aug 14 2016, 11:36 PM
There are quite a few jobs that do not require a lot of education or intelligence but are still not very threatened by automation. Haircutters, for instance, Or prostitution.
History will likely sooner make you wrong about that last thing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Klaus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
You know the current state of the art with regard to sex technology very well, I take it? ;)

The idea of "sex robots" is quite old, of course, but I think it is ultimately misguided. Even when people buy sex for money, they are not only looking for a mechanical sensation.
Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply