If Machines Produce Everything...

Forums › Off topic › If Machines Produce Everything...

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1409585 20-Oct-2015 08:35

MikeAqua: Why do people assume that AI will turn nasty?

It's common theme in fiction because it makes for an interesting plot.

Most unethical human behaviour arises from some sort of greed i.e. an obsessive desire for wealth, sex or power.

If an AI doesn't have those desires, what is it's motive to go all SkyNet on us?

I read an opinion that intelligent machines may not turn nasty as such -- but, humans will be destroyed as a means to an end.

Such as how people will build a road without considering the life that will die or be displaced due to the road construction. We're not specifically trying to destroy the habitat, but it happens as a by-product of building the road.

AI machines may need to kill/displace humans to complete their projects - not out of malice but as a necessity to complete their projects.

Anyway,all science fiction at this stage. But, i wonder at which point you can consider a machine self-aware -- how do you know a robot is thinking and self aware as opposed to simply executing code.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1409587 20-Oct-2015 08:42

Brendan:
1. Boringly predictable imaginings like 'the robots will take over' have been about since the 1950's and I find them all to be less than likely because they pre-suppose a level of incompetence that would preclude the ability to construct them in the first place. Furthermore, it is more efficient to co-operate than it is to compete.

Your fatal flaw is that you assume rational behaviour and perfect implementations.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1409722 20-Oct-2015 11:09

surfisup1000:
Brendan:
1. Boringly predictable imaginings like 'the robots will take over' have been about since the 1950's and I find them all to be less than likely because they pre-suppose a level of incompetence that would preclude the ability to construct them in the first place. Furthermore, it is more efficient to co-operate than it is to compete.

Your fatal flaw is that you assume rational behaviour and perfect implementations.

An argument can be made for and against perfect implementation of AI weapons.
This will probably fall on deaf ears though. The potential tactical advantages are so overwhelmingly attractive, it's probably inevitable that it's going to happen - an AI arms race.

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1409794 20-Oct-2015 13:27

If machines produce everything, then everything will be cheaper. Hawking is not an economist.

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1409878 20-Oct-2015 15:17

gzt: If machines produce everything, then everything will be cheaper.

I'm not so sure. It depends on who owns the means of production. The whole basis of capitalism is that ownership and control of the means of production gives you profit (aka unearned income). More control means bigger profits.

And machines don't just "produce" stuff... they turn raw materials (including energy) into stuff. Control over the raw materials also leads to profit.

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1409958 20-Oct-2015 16:59

Cars are cheap and everywhere because of mechanical innovations in the production process. The raw materials for that? There are many producers of steel.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1410016 20-Oct-2015 18:33

Not much chat on economics. If labour is not required, where do I get money to buy a new HT? Robot manufactured goods wont be free. They are merely saving labour cost, and replacing that with energy and component (metals, plastics) costs. Who manages the robot based companies? Where do the missing wages come from?

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1410057 20-Oct-2015 19:08

This isn't even AI - just from the pace of change in automation:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/73178690/accounting-body-says-almost-half-of-jobs-at-risk-from-automation

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1410077 20-Oct-2015 19:33

Fred99: This isn't even AI - just from the pace of change in automation:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/73178690/accounting-body-says-almost-half-of-jobs-at-risk-from-automation

Agree. Automation is everywhere. Its behind the scenes, removing labour, reducing expenses, allowing profits to be held, managed during periods of intense competition.
It reduces jobs, thats the whole point.

AI is a long way off, between now and then, robotics will increase, more jobs lost. But, in this period, companies will still be there, paying taxes, unemployment will become more of a challenge.

But one day, the ratio between employers and employees will alter drastically. There is still a need to earn money to live, that desire to reduce human labour will push that issue.

AI, well thats a while other story. Almost nobody needs to work. Sales of machine provided goods will be bought by who? How? With what?

The issue of AI taking over would exist, but the need to change economics from what we have now is an issue. Socialism would be a fit for that scenario. The need for money decreases as there is no way to earn it, so everybody owns a share in the economy. The desire to be rich might take a back seat to the desire to relax, have hobbies, be fit, grow gardens, be more energy self sufficient, play and watch sport and entertainment. In many ways, we could have a better healthier lifestyle if we had twice the daylight hours to do that.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1410092 20-Oct-2015 19:51

tdgeek:
Fred99: This isn't even AI - just from the pace of change in automation:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/73178690/accounting-body-says-almost-half-of-jobs-at-risk-from-automation

Agree. Automation is everywhere. Its behind the scenes, removing labour, reducing expenses, allowing profits to be held, managed during periods of intense competition.
It reduces jobs, thats the whole point.

AI is a long way off, between now and then, robotics will increase, more jobs lost. But, in this period, companies will still be there, paying taxes, unemployment will become more of a challenge.

But one day, the ratio between employers and employees will alter drastically. There is still a need to earn money to live, that desire to reduce human labour will push that issue.

AI, well thats a while other story. Almost nobody needs to work. Sales of machine provided goods will be bought by who? How? With what?

The issue of AI taking over would exist, but the need to change economics from what we have now is an issue. Socialism would be a fit for that scenario. The need for money decreases as there is no way to earn it, so everybody owns a share in the economy. The desire to be rich might take a back seat to the desire to relax, have hobbies, be fit, grow gardens, be more energy self sufficient, play and watch sport and entertainment. In many ways, we could have a better healthier lifestyle if we had twice the daylight hours to do that.

Lots of jobs have already been lost in manufacturing - but unemployment is relatively low as there's been growth in the "service sector". Next in line may be service sector jobs. What then?

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1410123 20-Oct-2015 20:17

Fred99:
tdgeek:
Fred99: This isn't even AI - just from the pace of change in automation:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/73178690/accounting-body-says-almost-half-of-jobs-at-risk-from-automation

Agree. Automation is everywhere. Its behind the scenes, removing labour, reducing expenses, allowing profits to be held, managed during periods of intense competition.
It reduces jobs, thats the whole point.

AI is a long way off, between now and then, robotics will increase, more jobs lost. But, in this period, companies will still be there, paying taxes, unemployment will become more of a challenge.

But one day, the ratio between employers and employees will alter drastically. There is still a need to earn money to live, that desire to reduce human labour will push that issue.

AI, well thats a while other story. Almost nobody needs to work. Sales of machine provided goods will be bought by who? How? With what?

The issue of AI taking over would exist, but the need to change economics from what we have now is an issue. Socialism would be a fit for that scenario. The need for money decreases as there is no way to earn it, so everybody owns a share in the economy. The desire to be rich might take a back seat to the desire to relax, have hobbies, be fit, grow gardens, be more energy self sufficient, play and watch sport and entertainment. In many ways, we could have a better healthier lifestyle if we had twice the daylight hours to do that.

Lots of jobs have already been lost in manufacturing - but unemployment is relatively low as there's been growth in the "service sector". Next in line may be service sector jobs. What then?

Already happening. You want to change a broadband, power, any sort of service, you do it online. The processing of that can be and is automated in many and growing instances. What then, yes, my point.

I want to get a lawnmower. The humanness online store, sends me one, using robotics. It send messages to the manufacturer to order more. The manufacturer sends messages to the component suppliers, all humanless. There might be robotics mining ore, transporting it, foundering it, rolling it, delivering it. Machines that cut the parts, assemble them, Ship to my online store's warehouse. Everything humanless.

Now, AI. I cannot see any reason to develop AI. I do see a risk with that. Taking over humans could happen, getting AI into the wrong hands, but why even develop AI? We could make any device to do anything by giving it instructions. The desire to develop AI is wasted IMO. If my robot mows my lawn, it doesn't need to do that to make lovely Tony happy, it will do that based on visual sensors. Same when it sprays weeds, sprays flowers, it knows all the NZ varieties. No need for AI.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1410125 20-Oct-2015 20:24

The work done by humans will change not vanish just like it has been doing for thousands of years.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1410127 20-Oct-2015 20:30

MikeB4: The work done by humans will change not vanish just like it has been doing for thousands of years.

If Machines Produce Everything, the thread site, won't that change be a change to close to 100% unemployment?

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1410132 20-Oct-2015 20:45

tdgeek:
MikeB4: The work done by humans will change not vanish just like it has been doing for thousands of years.

If Machines Produce Everything, the thread site, won't that change be a change to close to 100% unemployment?

One hundred years ago the vast majority of the population was employed in farming and secondary manufacturing industry. Forty years ago the majority was employed in Primary and secondary industry. Now the majority is employed in service industry and primary industry. The shift to service industries is accelerating, automation is changing employment not eliminating employment.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1410631 21-Oct-2015 18:37

MikeB4:
tdgeek:
MikeB4: The work done by humans will change not vanish just like it has been doing for thousands of years.

If Machines Produce Everything, the thread site, won't that change be a change to close to 100% unemployment?

One hundred years ago the vast majority of the population was employed in farming and secondary manufacturing industry. Forty years ago the majority was employed in Primary and secondary industry. Now the majority is employed in service industry and primary industry. The shift to service industries is accelerating, automation is changing employment not eliminating employment.

Problem with "service industry" as an option for future growth is that, IMO, there seems to be a distortion in who can afford "services", and a disproportionate amount of profit available in servicing the needs of the "one percenters". Whacking ceramic teeth into 70 YO's jaws, hawkers of other enhancements for the privileged few seem to be nicely profitable niches, but the bulk business in providing "service" like education (relatively poorly paid), retail work and "rest home care" etc, (absolutely lousy pay) to "average" folks, we've already seen "market failure" evidenced by the need to provide welfare to working folk by way of working for families, accommodation supplements etc.
I wish I could share your optimism that "new" service industry opportunities will appear as jobs are lost from increasing automation, but my gut feeling is that it's going to need intervention.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7