Predictions about a future with AI

[Stevicus]

From 1973:

"Nothing can go wrong with the GEEC!"

Of course, it ended in disaster - caused by a little mouse:

A cute cartoon from 50 years ago, yet it still raises some interesting points about AI. If machines do all the work and computers do all the thinking, what else would humans do? We could all sit at home and watch TV - or post silly cartoons on the internet.

On the other hand, there's something to be said for doing work and using our brains, as it gives humans a purpose.

Just some idle thoughts on a Saturday morning.

 

[Quagmire]

. . . there's something to be said for doing work and using our brains . . .

Yeah well look where that's gotten us.

I think the world might be better off once we're all spending all of our time at home watching TV and posting silly cartoons on the internet.

 

[HonestJoe]

A cute cartoon from 50 years ago, yet it still raises some interesting points about AI.

No it doesn't. AI and automation are two very different concepts. AI doesn't necessarily lead to automation (certainly not complete automation) and automation doesn't require AI (after all, we've be doing that for decades, arguably centuries).

The kind of centralised universal automation depicted in the show is entirely fictional and will remain so regardless of technological developments. It's neither practical nor desirable. Pretty much any drama/comedy fiction is the worst possible thing to use as a basis for discussion on this topic as it pretty much always depicts things which can't or won't happen (and sometimes sort of gives reasons why, as was the case here).

 

[Stevicus]

No it doesn't. AI and automation are two very different concepts. AI doesn't necessarily lead to automation (certainly not complete automation) and automation doesn't require AI (after all, we've be doing that for decades, arguably centuries).

The kind of centralised universal automation depicted in the show is entirely fictional and will remain so regardless of technological developments. It's neither practical nor desirable. Pretty much any drama/comedy fiction is the worst possible thing to use as a basis for discussion on this topic as it pretty much always depicts things which can't or won't happen (and sometimes sort of gives reasons why, as was the case here).

True, although fiction has some latitude and poetic license to depict things which might possibly be in an unforeseen future. Most fiction along those lines seem to appeal both to humanity's desire for technological progress and their simultaneous apprehension and fear about it. And yes, I would also agree that it goes back centuries, such as with the Luddites.

The most unrealistic thing here is that the creator of such a machine would actually give it away for free. There didn't seem to be any ulterior motive, and he seemed a genteel, affable fellow overall. That's not what most people would perceive about the tech industry these days.

 

[HonestJoe]

True, although fiction has some latitude and poetic license to depict things which might possibly be in an unforeseen future.

Quality Speculative Fiction certainly can, but you're not going to see that in Saturday morning cartoons.

Regardless, your question still has little to nothing to do with AI. It's irritating that so many people are leaping the fashionable term despite clearly having no idea what they're talking about.

 

[Twilight Hue]

From 1973:

"Nothing can go wrong with the GEEC!"

Of course, it ended in disaster - caused by a little mouse:

A cute cartoon from 50 years ago, yet it still raises some interesting points about AI. If machines do all the work and computers do all the thinking, what else would humans do? We could all sit at home and watch TV - or post silly cartoons on the internet.

On the other hand, there's something to be said for doing work and using our brains, as it gives humans a purpose.

Just some idle thoughts on a Saturday morning.

I think AI will usher in a dystopian world.

 

[Stevicus]

Quality Speculative Fiction certainly can, but you're not going to see that in Saturday morning cartoons.

Regardless, your question still has little to nothing to do with AI. It's irritating that so many people are leaping the fashionable term despite clearly having no idea what they're talking about.

Sorry you're so irritated by what was intended to be light-hearted discussion.

 

[Heyo]

Yeah well look where that's gotten us.

I think the world might be better off once we're all spending all of our time at home watching TV and posting silly cartoons on the internet.

Or pursuing any other hobby that isn't exploitative or destructive. But as @Stevicus has pointed out, AI and automation are unlikely to benefit all of us unless it is an economic inevitability or we fight really hard for it.
If we had wanted it, we could have had it 100 years ago. Not at the 100% level the GEEC could provide but at ever increasing levels. Instead we are working as much as ever if not more.

 

[Ella S.]

This conversation is a moot point.

The collapse of human civilization could occur at around 3 degrees of global warming. Total human extinction seems inevitable at around 6.

We're on track for 7. There are currently no realistic solutions for this problem and, after more than half a century of research, it seems unlikely that we will turn any up. That's even assuming that we haven't already triggered an unstoppable cascading effect, which we probably have.

Human extinction is our most likely scenario by a wide margin. Some experts estimate that extinction will occur within the century.

I know this thread is meant to be a light-hearted "what if," but I think that this sort of light-hearted optimism toward the future is damaging. I don't think we should be entertaining the idea that utopia is coming just around the corner. We're looking at climate apocalypse at best.

Aside from that, the future presented in this thread is also an unrealistic outcome, even ignoring the fact that humanity is going extinct. Replacing jobs with AI would result in a genocide of the working class, not increased quality of life.

 

[Stevicus]

I know this thread is meant to be a light-hearted "what if," but I think that this sort of light-hearted optimism toward the future is damaging. I don't think we should be entertaining the idea that utopia is coming just around the corner. We're looking at climate apocalypse at best.

You make some good points, although I'm not sure how damaging it is compared to many other aspects of our society and culture which seems almost oblivious to the consequences of climate change and the possibility of extinction. Too many people make their living from the virtually endless consumption that consumerism encourages. I say this as millions of people are out traveling and vacationing on this Fourth of July weekend. People tend to only think in terms of their own personal comforts, fun, and recreation.

This goes double for those at the top of the heap, who are the ones who should be setting the example for the rest of us to follow. Yet, with their private planes, second and third homes, jet-setting and vacationing all over the world - consuming and pollluting at a much higher rate than the average person - they're demonstrating that they don't even believe in climate change. And if they don't believe it, why would anyone at the lower levels in society believe it?

Aside from that, the future presented in this thread is also an unrealistic outcome, even ignoring the fact that humanity is going extinct. Replacing jobs with AI would result in a genocide of the working class, not increased quality of life.

A similar story was told in The Matrix trilogy, in the animated prequel called "The Animatrix," during "The Second Rennaissance" segment. It was similar to the GEEC, where humans lived in luxury (with no indication that the working classes were killed off) and machines did all of the necessary tasks for society.

 

[Heyo]

This conversation is a moot point.

The collapse of human civilization could occur at around 3 degrees of global warming. Total human extinction seems inevitable at around 6.

We're on track for 7. There are currently no realistic solutions for this problem and, after more than half a century of research, it seems unlikely that we will turn any up. That's even assuming that we haven't already triggered an unstoppable cascading effect, which we probably have.

Human extinction is our most likely scenario by a wide margin. Some experts estimate that extinction will occur within the century.

I know this thread is meant to be a light-hearted "what if," but I think that this sort of light-hearted optimism toward the future is damaging. I don't think we should be entertaining the idea that utopia is coming just around the corner. We're looking at climate apocalypse at best.

Aside from that, the future presented in this thread is also an unrealistic outcome, even ignoring the fact that humanity is going extinct. Replacing jobs with AI would result in a genocide of the working class, not increased quality of life.

Your overlooking that, while there are predictions for extinction within the century, predictions for AGI are within the decade and for the singularity within 40 years.
We are living in interesting times with very high risks and very high possible benefits.

 

[Pete in Panama]

I think AI will usher in a dystopian world.

--just like Ludd said that sewing machines would do the same. The anti-tech has ranted about television, about nukes, about computers, and now about AI. Imho they need to give it a rest.

 

[Pete in Panama]

This conversation is a moot point.

The collapse of human civilization could occur at around 3 degrees of global warming. Total human extinction seems inevitable at around 6.

We're on track for 7. There are currently no realistic solutions for this problem and, after more than half a century of research, it seems unlikely that we will turn any up. That's even assuming that we haven't already triggered an unstoppable cascading effect, which we probably have.

Human extinction is our most likely scenario by a wide margin. Some experts estimate that extinction will occur within the century.

I know this thread is meant to be a light-hearted "what if," but I think that this sort of light-hearted optimism toward the future is damaging. I don't think we should be entertaining the idea that utopia is coming just around the corner. We're looking at climate apocalypse at best.

Aside from that, the future presented in this thread is also an unrealistic outcome, even ignoring the fact that humanity is going extinct. Replacing jobs with AI would result in a genocide of the working class, not increased quality of life.

Right now the most ardent of AGW advocates are citing a 1-1/2C increase since 1880. Sure, someone could "claim" the entire planet is going to burst into flames by next week but mho is that we've got better things to do.

 

[Heyo]

Right now the most ardent of AGW advocates are citing a 1-1/2C increase since 1880. Sure, someone could "claim" the entire planet is going to burst into flames by next week but mho is that we've got better things to do.

The moment you have to start thinking is when the premiums for your insurance surpass the value of your house, so maybe in 10 years or so.

 

[Brickjectivity]

From 1973:

A related question is how women will be changed if they can always leave babysitting up to androids and can always have what they need. Imagine if women never have to wonder how they will be able to support children. What will change?

 

[Revoltingest]

OK, I finally decided to look in on this thread.
Who is Al?

 

[Jimmy]

People will soon realize it’s just a fancy search engine.

 

[Heyo]

People will soon realize it’s just a fancy search engine.

A fancy search engine that can take your job.

 

[Jimmy]

A fancy search engine that can take your job.

What job? Everything’s made in China

 

[Twilight Hue]

--just like Ludd said that sewing machines would do the same. The anti-tech has ranted about television, about nukes, about computers, and now about AI. Imho they need to give it a rest.

Not when algorithms are allowed to dictate and enforce rules and directives on people like the implementation of smart facial recognition technology, mass surveillance and enforcement, AI monitoring of people's behaviors, COMPAS, automated killing platforms for police and military etc.

It's more than just 'giving it a rest' to ignore and its going to get even worse from here on out.