AI.. soon to take over the world?
I am concerned about the role of AI in the future. More and more funding is going into AI including a international investment of $108 B recently announced on CNBC (not letting me post a link due to # of posts)
Already AI can do many things:
-
Best at Chess
-
Best at Jeopardy
-
Siri- Voice recognition software
-
Used in Behavioral Targeting to market to individuals
I mean who knows how far of an extent AI will reach? Why consult a doctor when AI can diagnose the symptoms better? Why ask legal advice from a lawyer?
Do you think that humans are essentially creating another intelligent race that will make decisions that will take over the world in the next century? If not that drastic, how far do you think this will go in the next 10, 20, 100 years? I think AI is taking over too much that humans should be in control of. We are losing out.
I don't have these answers, but I do highly recommend listening to Naval Ravikant on this subject in the Joe Rogan episode he's in for some initial perspectives. A couple major points:
Fascinating topic though, and really interesting to think about the ramifications.
Are you referencing the most recent one? (#1309) I believe his view had shifted between the two most recent interviews with Joe. Naval is extremely insightful, and I think he portrays the situation in the right light.
Yup, the most recent one.
Keep in mind AI research is still pretty expensive (Software developers do make bank after all). So I would doubt AI would seep into all facets of life unless something pushes it to do so. For instance raising the minimum wage to $30 would motivate AI developers to finding robot waiters, car washers, and any other low skilled jobs that fit in that range. But once progress is made in that range it could easily wind its way up the ladder.
tldr Place an emphasis in society on human workers and human interaction and we'll be fine.
Being able to play Chess and Jeopardy is nothing. Wait until they're running countries and planning the economy.
Maybe they should be at this rate... we should simulate the economy under different policies like they do in Madden before the Superbowl. AI should be a presidential debate contender to show what the data says by itself so we are aware of the pure facts, and we can then layer a human decision on top of that. I'm a big believer in data-driven decisions, reals over feels.
Data is overrated.
https://media2.giphy.com/media/dmB5vD2t2gR8Y/giphy-downsized.gif" alt="star trek data" />
It's great when trying to solve acute/specific problems. When trying to serve the needs of the citizenship/people, it becomes excessive. Data could put NBA robots on the court, and maybe people will watch it. But it would be a totally different game. There's no need for a government except to serve the interests of the people despite how wide the gap is in our respective positions presently. A data driven government, robotic leader, is a planned economy, or socialism. There's no need for capitalism because there shouldn't be any real inefficiencies exploitable by enterprising individuals.
Those are all really good points. I just wanted a reason to post Brent Spiner in a gif.
But in general don't you think on balance our politicians are ignoring both facts that impact the majority of the economy, climate, energy policy etc., as well as facts about discrimination of minority groups and vulnerable populations? I think more facts driving decisions could go a long way.
I agree. I do think the left is out of hand, even if there is some truthful and factual basis to their positions. But some of it is not fact or non-fact, either. Politics originally is simply a non-scientific approach to the people in the citizenship.
Technically, if people want to choose to believe in things once thought irrational, the people can do that, and a society can be built around that (unless it's a shitty premise). That's really what the American experiment came down to at its beginning.
So, all of this response to being handed the Great Recession of the millennials and Gen Z, might just be a new paradigm. Or, something else will cause another shift back to what society has known to be rational in the decades leading up to 2008, so that it just passes.
I don't think it's facts that are the problem. The truth is, everything the left and the right say tends to be more factual than false. It's just a matter of what people believe and how they funnel it through their lens of interpretation.
Like it's true that there are both people who followed the process to come to this country legally, and those who didn't. It's also true, that maybe we could've had a better process for decades now to allow for more people to come legally, while also it's true we could've had stronger border security, to prevent the complications we're now faced with. On the same topic, it's also true that those who came illegally are outside of the law and don't have protections people here legally are afforded, while also being true that it may be excessive and invasive for the government to tear apart neighborhoods.
Immigration, in the example, isn't necessarily a fact or non-facts divisive topic, it's more along the lines of what are going to be our prevailing beliefs as a society on the topic.
When it comes down to more data or a data driven/robotic decisionmaking government, it's goal should be, as you said, to remove the human element. But that's completely anti-climatic to a political system. A system that should be focused on individual contributions and the prevailing wants, desires, and beliefs of them too.
But, I think these are two separate things--what we as a society believe in is not the same as what is factual. The point of a marketplace is to capitalize on the human aspect to make competing factions squeeze out the best and most complimentary aspects of our social views on what's good. I think messy is good, and a perfect "efficient" system would be dull, unexciting, and probably crushing.
Porro possimus alias facilis ut libero cupiditate. Et voluptatum vero laudantium adipisci reprehenderit exercitationem.
Quos aut maxime sint occaecati nostrum est. Natus iste est consequatur doloremque. Corporis sit quibusdam pariatur vel enim id sed. Non quisquam delectus quidem et officia sunt sit. Adipisci dolores quia recusandae numquam omnis repellendus amet.
Iure suscipit ut quia ea. Id laboriosam porro beatae quia et et. Deleniti qui aliquid esse error.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...