New Kurzgesagt video about automation.... what do you guys think?

File: maxresdefault.jpg (187KB, 3000x1688px)

187KB, 3000x1688px

For those who haven't seen it yet.

https://youtu.be/WSKi8HfcxEk

Through machine learning, computers have achieved human accuracy or better in inputs like image recognition and voice recognition (extracting what was said) with neural networks vastly simpler and more arbitrary in structure than our own, which are also many magnitudes smaller. I'm doing research in this field (compsci, vision, PhD).

Anyone who thinks machines will never be at least as capable as humans at literally everything knows nothing about machine learning, biological neurology, or the ridiculous pace of both academic and commercial research in machine learning, robotics, and AI.

The only special sauce that led to us is time. There's nothing in our brains that's different from the rest of the universe. AND we're a flawed design marred by the funny coincidences of four billion years. There is no reason we can't make machines at least as capable as us.

>>129060268
Kurzgesagt is Jew propaganda

>>129063152
(((Kurzsegagt)))

>>129062425
Were about 10 years away from advanced ai system out performing the human brain.

Current AI system have an effective intellectual age of 5.

CGP Grey's video on it was better, IMO.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

Kurzgesagt said at the end that the second part is going to cover stuff like UBI... We'll see how that video goes.

>>129063912
My point is: Not at specific tasks. Current machine learning algos outperform the human brain at specific tasks. Higher intelligence and tying all that pattern recognition into decision making is definitely years off. But only years. Not decades, not centuries.

>>129060268
1. Machine learning is a meme. It's basic regression models and their derivatives applied to data. Machines are not learning shit, namely when faced with novel problems. They "learn" relative to a specific and limited problem they were designed to solve. This means you need the people who design the machines and supervisors.

2. I doubt machines will ever be able to replace actual humans when it comes to relationships between people. This means that any job hinging on this will not disappear. Think about working in a day care, taking care of the elderly, being a teacher, a salesman, being in politics, playing sports, etc.

3. That the number of hours people work is decreasing should not be worrisome. That is a 200 years trend, which started well before women started entering into the labor market.

>>129060268
There will always be jobs machines cannot do, and if there are no jobs they cannot do we will make jobs that machines will be either incapable or disallowed to in order to make room for humans.

>>129060268
>>129060693
It's fucking terrifying.

>>129065216
They are fucking learning to do jobs that humans are supposed to do, don't you understand?

The intricacy of the system leaves machines vulnerable to flaws.

Any failure with either the supply of resources or networking and power leaves them as expensive paperweights.
To account for this, the machines have to install failsafes for every variable disaster.

As such, costs of having them manage >80% of the work leads to a financial deficit in order to maintain such a position.

>>129063912
>>129064162
You guys are forgetting that we are smart because we are social not the other way around. Our intelligence is a byproduct of our sociability. And the latter is precisely what these machines will never replace. At the same time, this was, is and will always be an essential skill in the labor market.