Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Orbie · October 3, 2014, 11:50pm

…

Orbie · October 4, 2014, 1:12am

i had the article but somehow it got erased. To paraphrase, from: Ladislav Zjarka’s Science’s 2013, http//wwwlaumath.com/content
7/1/3

'Solving diffrential equtions are able to define models for a variety of pattern recognition. (Here ref. to James thread on pattern recognition)

primary functional approximation problem applying genetic programing techniques.
or, artificial neural network construction (ANN)
a common ANN operating principal based on entire simlarity relations of new printed input pattern with the traied ones.

Is this something akin tom what we were talking about? If so, then intuitive or apriori approaches to cybernetics is somewhat, or possibly warranted. If not, let it go as something possible but not necessarily probable. A kind of mind game.

Arminius · October 7, 2014, 3:41pm

Which thread do you mean?

Tom?

Orbie · October 7, 2014, 3:59pm

Sorry, I’ve had trouble with my computer with editing. It should read ‘to’, instead of ‘tom’. I read James’ blog on recognition, and i will try to find it in the archives, it’s been a while.

Arminius · October 7, 2014, 4:04pm

Thank you, Obe.

Arminius · October 8, 2014, 6:00pm

Humans have created machines and suppressed themselves (at least 99% of them), but they have not become machines!

Artimas · October 8, 2014, 6:15pm

They sure think and suppress emotions like them.

Arminius · October 15, 2014, 8:50am

Have you found it in the archives, Obe?

Orbie · October 15, 2014, 1:56pm

No, not yet, i am afraid, buti will contact him maybe he can tell me. He is here sometimes, maybe he will see this and respond to it. So James, if You are reading this, where can Your blog on facial recognition be found? Thanks

James_S_Saint · October 15, 2014, 2:06pm

My blog on facial recognition???
What blog?

Orbie · October 15, 2014, 2:19pm

Then it’s on ‘recognition’ i am certain of it, about a tear ago. I will find some time today, and really search them archives, unless i am hallucinating. No i am certain of it, and even made a mental note to go back to it. LOL

Arminius · November 9, 2014, 10:43pm

Today I found this website:
[list][list][list][list]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stowe-boyd/robots-jobs-purpose-humans_b_5689813.html[/list:u][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u]

James_S_Saint · November 9, 2014, 11:01pm

The indications are fairly stark. The work in routine occupations is trending toward zero. This fall lines up fairly well with the rise of automation of various kinds. For example, computer programs are doing the work of paralegals and x-ray technicians, and factory robots are displacing large numbers of automobile assembly line workers. There are applications that can write sports newspaper articles, based simply on the scoring history in the game.

Of course, for those who consider science fiction as the best oracle for an unknowable future, consider this shot in the dark from Isaac Asimov, who wrote in 1964 about a visit to the World’s Fair of 2014:
The world of A.D. 2014 will have few routine jobs that cannot be done better by some machine than by any human being. Mankind will therefore have become largely a race of machine tenders.
Soon, all that will be left for human beings will be the non-routine, creative work. How many of our occupations will our software overlords steal away from us? Many more than today, according to Carl Benedict Frey and Michael A. Osborne, two researchers at Oxford who looked at 702 current occupations.
“Soon, all that will be left for human beings will be the non-routine, creative work.”

The researchers found that approximately half of current occupations (47 percent) are at risk of going the way of the telephone operator within just a decade or two. These two researchers relied on the same matrix of work as the Federal Reserve team, and examined how quickly robotic dexterity and A.I. cognition would hollow out jobs that seem to be the preserve of humans today:
Our findings could be interpreted as two waves of computerisation, separated by a "technological plateau". In the first wave, we find that most workers in transportation and logistics occupations, together with the bulk of office and administrative support workers, and labour in production occupations, are likely to be substituted by computer capital.
Note that the “transportation and logistics” sector includes many occupations that will be slammed by autonomous vehicles, like truckers (the number one occupation for men in the U.S. currently), taxi drivers and warehouse workers. Administrative support is the number one job for women in the US, so our robot overlords are equal opportunity, at least.

Frey and Osborne suggest that the second future wave of displacement will come at some later date, when A.I. gains the secrets of creativity and social intelligence. That may take a longer time, but at some future date, lawyers, engineers, brain surgeons and even actors might be displaced by 'bots. In fact, one venture capital firm, Deep Knowledge Ventures, has already appointed an algorithm to its board of directors.
“Lawyers, engineers, brain surgeons and even actors might be displaced by 'bots.”

So, we are confronted with the critical question of 2025, as I stated in the recent Pew Internet report, AI, Robotics, and the Future of Jobs:
What are people for in a world that does not need their labor, and where only a minority are needed to guide the 'bot-based economy?
While it is likely that for the next few decades the educated, creative and inventive will find avenues to gainful employment, that will not be the case for all. How will we organize our world if machines can provide goods and services at lower and lower costs while fewer and fewer have income enough to buy anything?

“when A.I. gains the secrets of creativity and social intelligence.”
Unknown to the author of that story, “they” already have it.

Tortis · November 10, 2014, 8:53pm

They don’t. That’s why my job as a translator is not under threat from computers. Free machine translation like Google Translate has come along in the time I have been working as a translator, but it hasn’t made any difference to my work. Google Translate, machine translation and AI generally can’t do what I can do, because AI doesn’t have social intelligence, and it never will, because social intelligence depends on conscious, embodied experience, and computation is irrelevant to conscious, embodied experience.

Arminius · November 11, 2014, 10:03pm

And you do not think that this threat will come?

Flannel_Jesus · November 11, 2014, 10:24pm

My wife is a translator. A huge, huge, huge portion of jobs agencies are handing out has gone from ‘Translate this for 8p / word’ to ‘This has been machine-translated; just edit it for 5p / word.’

Tortis · November 11, 2014, 10:35pm

Nobody has ever offered me anything like that. But I deliver high quality work in demanding subject areas, most people can’t do what I do, machine translation doesn’t stand a chance in my market.

Tortis · November 11, 2014, 10:38pm

No, there are insurmountable barriers to human-level computer translation. To properly understand human language it is necessary to live in a world of experience.

Arminius · November 11, 2014, 10:38pm

What do you think about the future of the translators?

Flannel_Jesus · November 12, 2014, 7:39am

Very, very difficult barriers. Insurmountable? I wouldn’t go that far. Language is complex, but it is extremely finite as well.

I would give translation less than 10 years before a computer can do it nearly as well as a professional. Better before 50 years.