LogFAQs > #952551770

darkknight109 posted...

We're not talking about when things are "mostly automated"; we're talking about when things are fully automated.

Again, you keep bouncing back and forth between these two on the exact same point; pick one and stick with it.

Thats at least another few decades at the very soonest. And that if it ever even gets there. Because I dont think it will ever be fully automated. And what two points am I jumping between

darkknight109 posted...

No, actually, they don't.

Learning robots are a thing that exists right now. These are robots that aren't programmed for anything in particular, but can watch a human (or other robot) performing a task and mimic that task, in essence teaching themselves how to perform any given job you need them for. This can be cooking food, putting groceries away and, hypothetically, strapping wheelchairs into bus seats.

Right now this technology is still in its infancy, but it's a proof the concept works. The days of needing to specifically design a robot for one and only one task are rapidly ending; modern neural networks and learning AI are capable of learning any task you need them to perform.

Yes. They actually do. The same program for driving a self-driving car isnt the same for self-checkout. And neither are the same for diagnosing patients. And being built for something isnt just the program, but the actual machine itself. Anything dealing with plumbing would have to be water proof, where something dealing with electric has to be shock proof. The tech is different for each. Learning isnt the only thing they need. And they would probably install basic programming for whatever specialty they want it to know. It makes no sense to use a blank slate robot to learn everything if there are basic things it should and could know. Nor does on type of robot fit every type of job. For example, the type of robot you describe sounds like a housekeeping robot. But Im not sure Id want it to do some advanced plumbing if its not built for that (wrong size, not waterproof, only has basic plumbing knowledge, etc.)

As for the bus seats, we still dont have anything like that, though. And thats still hypothetically moving someone to the spot and strapping them in. But nothing like that is out there yet. And who knows if it will be anytime soon. Because even if they build robots, Im pretty sure thats not going to be high on their list Also, before we have robots performing multiple tasks, we should probably start at one. Since those arent even commonplace yet

Theres also the whole watching the automations thing. I feel people would eventually have to. Automations will eventually degrade over time. And even if you have automation watch automation for degrading, those could also degrade. Eventually, you have a never ending line of automation watching automation, and possibly all degrading or whatever Plus, the required materials. I cant say how much it will take. But it would probably be a lot

darkknight109 posted...

And this is one of the open questions that will need to be solved before full - or even majority - automation is achieved.

Because money *is* going to go away in that future. There's no way around it. Money and commerce can't exist without human labour, because how do we pay someone if there's no jobs for them to do because robots do it all better and more effectively than humans can?

But there are still limited goods, land being an excellent example. So there will still be some form of exchange, but we need to work out what form that will take in order for it to be fair and reasonable.

You would still need a bartering system. The thing is, we already have one in place: money Why get rid of the bartering system we already have to make another. IF everything is going to be free (it wont), then theres nothing you could trade for land. Thats why they will probably keep money around. Theres absolutely no proof that money is going away. Theres no proof its staying, either. But it staying makes way more sense than it just going away. And there will still be human labor for so long. The problem is, even if we reach a point where most things were automated, money will be around. And barely anyone would have it. And the ones that do probably wont have much And then many people probably wont trust robots. Especially if they have the ability to be hacked Which they probably can be (It would probably be a safety function, tbh) And materials will cost money, too. To make whatever you want would still require you to have the materials to do so. And with a limited supply on certain things, they will probably also cost money Money is probably going to stay around forever

darkknight109 posted...

Not the case, actually - some of the first chess computer AI actually determined that situations that grandmasters thought were automatic losses could actually be played out to a draw, or even a victory.

Also, since you're talking about "moving pieces", I'm guessing you're not familiar with how Go works, because there's no pieces to move. You put stones wherever you like on the board. Being able to understand the game and predict your opponent's strategy (and not fall for bluffs or feints) is critical and something that can't just be brute-forced by an AI, which is what I mentioned earlier. Yet the AI has managed to surpass that issue.

They probably got data from more than Grandmasters, though. Because they still had to know the basics. And because they are a computer, can usually tell how people will move. I know people in real life who werent good at chess who lost very fast because they didnt know how to play. I mean, there are ways to make two bad moves to be put in a spot where check mate will happen or something. Fools Mate, I think. But they would probably have many different ways of playing programed. And by using a move that would normally result in a lost, can actually help them to move their opponents pieces in the way they want. Like manipulation. And I know nothing about Go. There is a person here who plays, but Ive never taken an interest in it. And an AI could easily predict an opponents move. Since I believe there is still a limited amount of moves one could make. And they could probably play out multiple scenarios. Also by doing something thats been done before. While both games probably have many moves to make, they still are limited to a certain amount. And as they make more moves, the different amount they can make gets smaller and smaller
---

Official King of Kings
Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around.