- 57,138
- 60,132
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2012
Even as a programmer?
lil robot passes "self awareness" test vol....it has begun
- 43,402
- 42,952
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
Well you bring up a good point. There is an ethical decision to make in the future. Simple jobs can and WILL be replaced by automation in the future, but the question is when. It's all a numbers game at that point. If the cost to keep humans in bottom skill level jobs is cheaper than automation then yes they'll keep them. As soon as those numbers fluctuate it'll be a wrap. It's more than just dollars per hour too. Think of the amount of people filing for DHS support and such after losing a job. All this adds up. Now, here's where the ethical standpoint comes in. Those who are only able to do lower level worst are essentially casted out. This in turns creates a huge division in class and living conditions. Sounds like science fiction but it's actually a byproduct in all of this. So the question is, do you create this division or do you withhold the technology? Also, of the two, which is actual progress?
Last edited:
Top Boy
formerly jay patt
- 8,405
- 5,622
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2013
This is what gave me the extra incentive I needed to enter into IT.
Dat job security
- 3,859
- 4,737
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2012
It is significantly cheaper to outsource the ordering at the fast food drive through. Still, years after the idea came about, it is not anywhere near universally done. People overestimating our ability to change by a lot.
- 12,076
- 11,488
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2008
- 430
- 70
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2007
AI is the next step in human evolution. The current progress of humans is defined by our technology; fire, agriculture, the printing press, the microchip, and space travel. AI is the next step. Based on Moores law and current trends by 2045 will have created an intelligence smarter than ourselves. There is no reason this intelligence would every fear us. We wouldn't be able to stop it. The second it goes live I would imagine it would create failsafes and back itself up in various locations. As it rewrites its own code to become more efficient we wouldn't be able to keep up with it. The only way for us to do so would be biomedical enhancements. Essentially becoming more robotic ourselves. Biological evolution is slow and can't keep up with us. AI and melding with it would gives us that opportunity. As an organism we've got reproduction pretty much down thus as a species we've moved toward knowledge and understanding of our universe. We can't accomplish that very well in our current form given time and the vastness of the universe. Our bodies aren't made to last or travel through space. Our minds can't even comprehend the size of space and the time it takes to cross it. A digital you, the next step up from an AI would make that possible. Barring world wide destruction its an inevitable conclusion. So many people, who have access to the technology, are already immersed in it. Cell phones, google glass, fit bits its all a little bit closer to this next step. While sitting here typing this as a Type 1 diabetic I have two devices attached to my body, one monitoring my blood glucose the other delivering insulin. I have robot machines keeping me alive. There are a lot more grand themes involved in this technological singularity. If you're interested check out Kurzweil's stuff.
- 22,094
- 9,980
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2013
automation.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...e-operated-by-robots/articleshow/48238331.cms
from 650 workers to 60 and going to be less even soon . People will be replaced by robots. this is just the beginning.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...e-operated-by-robots/articleshow/48238331.cms
from 650 workers to 60 and going to be less even soon . People will be replaced by robots. this is just the beginning.
Last edited:
- 31,469
- 1,915
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2003
Sir San Diego
formerly brolic scholar
- 12,456
- 10,878
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2011
.
Last edited:
- 87,735
- 50,125
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
Top Boy
formerly jay patt
- 8,405
- 5,622
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2013
It's just a factory man
If there was a ranking for them, it'd probably be in the top 10 most repetitive jobs. Machines are definitely gods of repetition in comparison to us..
All they really need is a staff of trained workers to do maintenance on the machines whenever necessary. Maybe a few for security, few for facilities..
No need for shift leads or managers (excluding the manager of the technicians) because there are very few human employees.
Still not impressed.
Last edited:
- 3,253
- 3,006
- Joined
- May 12, 2011
We ARE artificial intelligence. We were created the same way we are creating these robots.
You all know the saying god created man in his own image. Well, we are creating robots in our image cause we are gods. Then the next step is for robots to create in their own image and so on.
You all know the saying god created man in his own image. Well, we are creating robots in our image cause we are gods. Then the next step is for robots to create in their own image and so on.
- 87,735
- 50,125
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
- 3,253
- 3,006
- Joined
- May 12, 2011
That quote doesnt apply to what we have today. Dude died in 07 and we got Cortana cracking jokes on windows 10. Give in 10 more years
- 87,735
- 50,125
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
The quote directly applies to the statement (that came off like you were stating a fact) I quoted.
When he died is irrelevant
Last edited:
- 3,253
- 3,006
- Joined
- May 12, 2011
My statement isnt fact. Its my opinion and so is his statement. Him dieing in 07 is relevant cause hes not around so see artificial intelligence evolve like we have now. Ex. Title of this thread.The quote directly applies to the statement (that came off like you were stating a fact) I quoted.
When he died is irrelevant
- 4,323
- 4,705
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2011
Nope a good 200 years it's going to take a genius AI for robots to start programming
@ you thinking it'll be 200 years...try 20.
Last edited:
- 4,758
- 1,409
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2012
200 years is od I was exaggerating, but 20 years ?...not gonna happen. All of the processes that go into programming and software engineering in general. I highly doubt AI will be smart enough to do documentation, system design, maintain and navigate through complex systems, test, communicate with customers and management to make sure they are on the right track, and program.
Now if you are talking simple hello world and other things like thay okay, but besides that I am doubtful of 20 years. If robots get to the point where they can replace software engineers I am confident there won't be many jobs left they will all be replaced by robots.
- 43,402
- 42,952
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2013
It's just a factory man
If there was a ranking for them, it'd probably be in the top 10 most repetitive jobs. Machines are definitely gods of repetition in comparison to us..
All they really need is a staff of trained workers to do maintenance on the machines whenever necessary. Maybe a few for security, few for facilities..
No need for shift leads or managers (excluding the manager of the technicians) because there are very few human employees.
Still not impressed.
What isn't repetition? I mean that's the question. Repetition is just another word for mathematical. A lot of jobs could simplified that way.
- 4,323
- 4,705
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2011
200 years is od I was exaggerating, but 20 years ?...not gonna happen. All of the processes that go into programming and software engineering in general. I highly doubt AI will be smart enough to do documentation, system design, maintain and navigate through complex systems, test, communicate with customers and management to make sure they are on the right track, and program.
Now if you are talking simple hello world and other things like thay okay, but besides that I am doubtful of 20 years. If robots get to the point where they can replace software engineers I am confident there won't be many jobs left they will all be replaced by robots.
I think you are drastically underestimating the capabilities of machine learning. There are algorithms that can already write simple programs, write news articles, etc. The only thing holding back AI at this point are algorithms that allow for recursive self improvement. After that hurdle has been tackled, AI will improve exponentially.
flesh prince
Banned
- 5,558
- 2,913
- Joined
- May 31, 2015
- 5,617
- 3,335
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2015
I'd give robots hands all day. Wassup. That chick doe
- 4,758
- 1,409
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2012
I think you are underestimating all of the task I just said. Writing simple programs and replacing software engineers are two totally different things.
Doesn't matter to me if it happens it happens, I'll be long out of the software engineering field by then. Feel bad for future generations, there will be no jobs if they achieve this level of AI.
- 32,585
- 80,506
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2013
The quote absolutely still applies. And Cortana or Siri are terrible examples to disprove him. You'd be better off using Watson but even then you'd still be wrong.My statement isnt fact. Its my opinion and so is his statement. Him dieing in 07 is relevant cause hes not around so see artificial intelligence evolve like we have now. Ex. Title of this thread.The quote directly applies to the statement (that came off like you were stating a fact) I quoted.
When he died is irrelevant
And this is really all that matters. I'll be dead or retired so I don't care.
The machine overlords can do whatever the hell they want by then.
I'll have already lived my life, made my money and spent my money on hookers and coke.
- 22,094
- 9,980
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2013
these are just factory workers as well right .
It's just a factory man
If there was a ranking for them, it'd probably be in the top 10 most repetitive jobs. Machines are definitely gods of repetition in comparison to us..
All they really need is a staff of trained workers to do maintenance on the machines whenever necessary. Maybe a few for security, few for facilities..
No need for shift leads or managers (excluding the manager of the technicians) because there are very few human employees.
Still not impressed.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/t...reds-to-urge-ban-on-military-robots.html?_r=0
from the article
"In a letter unveiled as researchers gathered at the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Buenos Aires on Monday, the signatories argued that the deployment of robots capable of killing while untethered to human operators is “feasible within years, not decades.” If development is not cut off, it is only a matter of time before the weapons end up in the hands of terrorists and warlords, they said."
like i stated this is just the beginning . The future , and the change that we are going to have to adapt to in the near future looks very interesting to say the least.
this is an interesting read when you have some time to kill
http://www.cgpgrey.com/blog/humans-need-not-apply
Last edited:
