The Future of "Work"

[WestCanMan]

There are warehouses and mail-sorting stations that have no humans in them. 

Machines can work faster than humans, and they can do it 24 hrs a day without breaks, easily replacing several humans. And when those machines break down, other machines can repair them.  

AI can belch out poems, essays, reports, videos and graphics as fast as you can relate your ideas to it. 

AI can drive cars and fly drones.

Machines can perform more and more complex surgeries all the time. It takes a long time for a human to learn how to perform surgery or create videos, and we don't live as long as machines do. When a surgeon dies, decades of knowledge and experience are lost forever, but a robot can learn everything a doctor has ever written within minutes, and even corroborate that with the life's work of other surgeons. 

Are we humans becoming redundant? If you were about to graduate HS right now, what jobs can you guarantee to be human-only ten years from now? Who would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to become a surgeon, and who would become a programmer or a ______ or ______, knowing that AI can diagnose and treat better than humans can? 

If we become redundant as contributors to society, how many of our bloated asses should even be on this planet, just killing and eating every other species? 

Eventually AI is gonna have that discussion. 

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Are we humans becoming redundant?  

Are we humans becoming redundant?

[Nefarious Banana]

Resource based industry is becoming more mechanized, but there are many facets that are still 'hands-on' . . .  and always will be.  

[WestCanMan]

27 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Resource based industry is becoming more mechanized, but there are many facets that are still 'hands-on' . . .  and always will be.  

TBH, I think it will be harder to replace a plumber than an accountant, for example. The jobs that require more education and less adaptability will be easier to replace IMO. 

I think a robot could scan all my receipts and laugh at all the sh1t I try to write off faster than any human could, but I don't think you can find the perfect robot to go into every crawlspace and get h/w tanks in and out. 

If there's a robo-accountant bot, I would easily pay tens of thousands of dollars for it. It could sit in my car and just nag me all the time: "Gimme the receipt for that. Throw that rec't out. Log your mileage here..."

[User]

I work with AI daily. 

Right now, it is like an eager intern that thinks it knows everything. It still needs a lot of adult supervision to make sure its work is correct. 

Like most things, in my experience, it has become an enabler of more efficient work for humans, not replacing them. 

We are a long ways away from any kind of complete automation society. 

[eyeball]

4 minutes ago, User said:

We are a long ways away from any kind of complete automation society.

Will AI suffer the same moral panic people do over nonworking unproductive humans?

[User]

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Will AI suffer the same moral panic people do over nonworking unproductive humans?

Well, I think we do need to consider some regulations around its use and its capacity for fraud, deceit, and other illegal schemes. 

Outside of that, its the same old panic about replacing humans... 

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Are we humans becoming redundant?

Yes we are

If we continue to demand more the less companies and manufacturers will want humans.

We have outpriced ourselves already with most manufacturing being done out of country. What remains will become automate dtherfore cheaper with less headache for companies

[ExFlyer]

2 minutes ago, User said:

Well, I think we do need to consider some regulations around its use and its capacity for fraud, deceit, and other illegal schemes. 

Outside of that, its the same old panic about replacing humans... 

There will be no regulation to AI.

In it's infancy now, it is near impossible to tell if it is real or AI. It will only become more and more sophisticated.

[User]

1 minute ago, ExFlyer said:

There will be no regulation to AI.

In it's infancy now, it is near impossible to tell if it is real or AI. It will only become more and more sophisticated.

At this point in time, AI is powered by massive industry of servers and computational power. It is not some abstract thing. 

You regulate it by regulating the industry running it. 

 

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, User said:

Outside of that, its the same old panic about replacing humans... 

I'm a little worried that humans will still be every bit as responsible for pulling their economic weight and this expectation will be deeply rooted in the same sort of social conservatism found in a 19th century workhouse.

[ExFlyer]

10 minutes ago, User said:

At this point in time, AI is powered by massive industry of servers and computational power. It is not some abstract thing. 

You regulate it by regulating the industry running it. 

 

It will always be powered by massive servers and computational power.

My point is how can it be regulated if you cannot tell it is AI generated?

Look at the American election ad lately as an example. So real, so convincing that most cannot tell and will not care. The average person (most people)will not know it is AI generated.

Regulating the legitimate industry will only drive and expand the underground industry. If caught, they shut down there and reopen elsewhere. It happens now with many companies and businesses and will continue with AI.

 

[Nefarious Banana]

AI isn't going to pack that Husqvarna 3120XP and my gear up the hill to fall that old growth fir ... so that the yuppies in Victoria will have some sh!tpaper to wipe their sorry asses.  

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, User said:

I work with AI daily. 

Right now, it is like an eager intern that thinks it knows everything. It still needs a lot of adult supervision to make sure its work is correct. 

Like most things, in my experience, it has become an enabler of more efficient work for humans, not replacing them. 

We are a long ways away from any kind of complete automation society. 

I don't think AI will replace everyone in the next few years, but it's worth thinking about what AI won't replace within the next 15 years.

Some educations take 10 years. What will be left to do for another 10 years after that, and how lucrative will those jobs really be at that point? 

[TreeBeard]

1 hour ago, Nefarious Banana said:

AI isn't going to pack that Husqvarna 3120XP and my gear up the hill to fall that old growth fir ... so that the yuppies in Victoria will have some sh!tpaper to wipe their sorry asses.  

No, but machines certainly will.  AI will just be the platform to design the machine and techniques on how to replace you.  

[Michael Hardner]

Are we humans becoming redundant?

[herbie]

Well we better not tax those machines and their owners and pay those out of work people so they can eat and buy things because that would be soshulism....

[WestCanMan]

21 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Are we humans becoming redundant?

Some people are purpose-driven. Some people need to feel like they're contributing to society, not just taking from it. 

It's a conservative thing, anathema to Libs. You wouldn't understand. 

[Michael Hardner]

51 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Some people are purpose-driven. Some people need to feel like they're contributing to society, not just taking from it. 

It's a conservative thing, anathema to Libs. You wouldn't understand. 

I don't understand.  In the same way you don't understand humour or non-sequiturs.

[CdnFox]

Technology has been replacing jobs for hundreds of years now. 300 years ago 80% of the population worked in agriculture because that was what was necessary in order to feed the human population. Now only 20% do.

And whenever this happens, humans find a way to use it as a tool to create new and better jobs. Combine harvesters got rid of the need for people to wander around with scythes,  but those people (or their kids anyway) just stopped doing agri jobs and learned t be scientists and doctors and lawyers and electricians and learned to code etc. 

There's no chance of humanity becoming redundant. Whenever technology has made possible that humans have more time on their hands than humans have taken things to the next step and created something new.

AI is a statistical concept. There is no danger of it taking over humans as a result. If all you can do is copy you need something to copy from.

[August1991]

On 9/12/2024 at 5:54 PM, CdnFox said:

Technology has been replacing jobs for hundreds of years now. 300 years ago 80% of the population worked in agriculture because that was what was necessary in order to feed the human population. Now only 20% do.

...

Well said.

====

WestCanMan, you don't understand what CdnFox is arguing.

[WestCanMan]

On 9/13/2024 at 6:49 PM, August1991 said:

Well said.

====

WestCanMan, you don't understand what CdnFox is arguing.

Of course I do, but he's talking about things like:

• weavers being replaced by the loom
• monks slaving to transcribe bibles being replaced by the printing press
• mail-sorters being replaced by robot arms that scan bardcodes.

I'm talking about things like:

•  doctors being replaced
• surgeons being replaced
• Computer programmers being replaced
• graphic designers being replaced
• camera crews and set designers being replaced
• architects and engineers being replaced

I'm not talking about slaves being replaced by machines that do work that they didn't want to do anyways. This isn't the cotton ginny. Are you kidding me right now? AI can take over almost any job that you do, and do it 100x as fast.

Cdn Fox is talking about slaves and unskilled labourers losing low-paying jobs that they hated. Some people love being graphics designer, or constructing movie sets, etc. The LOVE those jobs. Or doing surgery. These are family-sustaining jobs that people love doing. 

When did technology ever take those jobs from people before? In the past tech has made some of those jobs a bit easier, and helped them achieve better finished results, but it didn't replace humans entirely. This is a whole new ball game.

How many accountants can be replaced by an AI robot? That guy whose office you visit, and who only wants to work 40 hrs a week, can be replaced by a robot that can update itself with 50 pages new tax laws in under one second. That bot can glance at all of the receipts that are visible on your desk, scan them, save them, categorize them, and file them all up to date on a second-by-second basis. It's not limited to 40 hrs a week but it can already do the job of 10 accountants in 40 hrs. And ten is a light estimate, maybe 50? 

If you were abut to graduate HS, and you were thinking about going to university to get into a career to last you 40 years, what career can you think of where you couldn't be replaced by an AI robot within 15 years? And just remember, you'll be in university for 4-10 of those 15 years.... You could go pay a sh1t-ton of money for a university education that's basically redundant within a few years of your graduation.

Edited September 15, 2024 by WestCanMan

[CdnFox]

12 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Of course I do, but he's talking about things like:

• weavers being replaced by the loom
• monks slaving to transcribe bibles being replaced by the printing press
• mail-sorters being replaced by robot arms that scan bardcodes.

I'm talking about things like:

•  doctors being replaced
• surgeons being replaced
• Computer programmers being replaced
• graphic designers being replaced
• camera crews and set designers being replaced
• architects and engineers being replaced

I'm not talking about slaves being replaced by machines that do work that they didn't want to do anyways. This isn't the cotton ginny. Are you kidding me right now? AI can take over almost any job that you do, and do it 100x as fast.

Cdn Fox is talking about slaves and unskilled labourers losing low-paying jobs that they hated. Some people love being graphics designer, or constructing movie sets, etc. The LOVE those jobs. Or doing surgery. These are family-sustaining jobs that people love doing. 

When did technology ever take those jobs from people before? In the past tech has made some of those jobs a bit easier, and helped them achieve better finished results, but it didn't replace humans entirely. This is a whole new ball game.

How many accountants can be replaced by an AI robot? That guy whose office you visit, and who only wants to work 40 hrs a week, can be replaced by a robot that can update itself with 50 pages new tax laws in under one second. That bot can glance at all of the receipts that are visible on your desk, scan them, save them, categorize them, and file them all up to date on a second-by-second basis. It's not limited to 40 hrs a week but it can already do the job of 10 accountants in 40 hrs. And ten is a light estimate, maybe 50? 

If you were abut to graduate HS, and you were thinking about going to university to get into a career to last you 40 years, what career can you think of where you couldn't be replaced by an AI robot within 15 years? And just remember, you'll be in university for 4-10 of those 15 years.... You could go pay a sh1t-ton of money for a university education that's basically redundant within a few years of your graduation.

Honestly i think we'll see in time that it's the same thing.

AI can't replace lawyers. It CAN replace articling students going over briefs but that just frees them up to do other things. 

And if it did replace lawyers then those people would go on to do something else.

I'm sure most of us who are over the age of 50 remember when computers were going to totally replace secretaries. 

The more we create tools to do our work for us, the more we find other work to do.

Time will tell, but honestly I wouldn't worry about it

[WestCanMan]

10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Time will tell, but honestly I wouldn't worry about it

Would you worry about it if you were just going into university though?

[Michael Hardner]

Secretaries WERE replaced.  But whatever came after was better.