Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You know, it’s kind of hard to take you serious when every argument you create is xyz will be true in the future, and I can’t prove it, but I’m going to tell you if you don’t believe me you’re closed minded and ignorant. It’s not even a discussion. It’s a one sided talking down to. That’s just my perception.
.
That's pretty much all AI/Climate Change/Chicken Littler economic arguments though.
But how am I even responding to you at this very moment? I'm already dead from the effects of leaving the Paris Accords, and doubly dead from the fiasco of Net Neutrality.
Advancements in technology will always create jobs is true right up until the point it isn't. The buggy and wheel didn't make horses obsolete, but the car and train did. Automation in the past did not make humans obsolete because humans could always do something better then automation brought to the table.
But when AI's can out think us, and have robotics that allows them to outperform us, there will be nothing we do better for the most part. And that's the day its different suddenly. And our computing capabilities and ai software development is advancing at a dramatic pace. Its the combination of physical and intellectual abilities of robotics and AI combined that is coming to replace us. And with hardware and software advancing at exponential paces it will come sooner then we expect it too.
There's some confusion in this thread between plain-vanilla automation & computerization vs artificial intelligence. If I use my smartphone to photograph and deposit a paper check into my checking account, that's not AI. If I use a kiosk or a smartphone application to order fast food, that's not AI. A machine that cooks burgers doesn't have any AI in it.
Autonomous automobiles, when they finally get here, require AI. They use visual (and/or RADAR) perception to learn and make decisions. The CNC machine in the factory that replaced dozens of machinists doesn't have artificial intelligence.
THIS is technically inaccurate if you look at the pure definition of AI. Anything that is capable of replacing a human task is technically AI. You can look up symbolic AI and see that things like if/else statements that automate simple human decision making also fall under the AI umbrella. AI is very broad. I often show a Venn diagram where AI is the largest and within AI is Machine Learning and within ML is Deep Learning. When most people think of AI they are usually thinking of what Deep Learning is capable of, but it’s really much more broad than that.
Let's assume for the moment that AI will indeed have a substantial negative impact on employment. (Let's not argue that assumption for now).
When do you all think it will clearly show up in real employment data? I know, this is just speculation, but assuming it happens, when will it be clear to all?
Let's assume for the moment that AI will indeed have a substantial negative impact on employment. (Let's not argue that assumption for now).
When do you all think it will clearly show up in real employment data? I know, this is just speculation, but assuming it happens, when will it be clear to all?
Like most such trends, it won't really be evident until it's gained some traction; there will be a retrospective viewpoint that will clearly show the start and early rise of the curve that was largely unnoticed at the time.
The first significant inroads of AI into desk/white collar/'intellectual' jobs will be within five years. The big panic and 20/20 hind vision, no more than ten.
Modeling of the effects of climate change, expressed across a range of maximum global rise, are out there for anyone who cares to review them.
Model this:
“Even though the warm Eemian period was a period when the oceans were four to eight meters higher than today, the ice sheet in northwest Greenland was only a few hundred meters lower than the current level, which indicates that the contribution from the Greenland ice sheet was less than half the total sea-level rise during that period,” says Dorthe Dahl-Jensen, Professor at the Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, and leader of the NEEM-project.
Apparently, you can't wrap your brain around the fact that during the Eemian (the prior Inter-Glacial Period), CO2 levels peaked at 287 ppm CO2.
Prove to us --- with absolute certainty -- that if CO2 levels were 285 ppm CO2 instead of 400+ppm CO2, the sea levels would not rise another 4 meters to 8 meters anyway.
What we did, or did not do, or what we coulda, woulda, shoulda done, doesn't make a damn bit of difference, because the sea levels are going to rise another 4 meters to 8 meters and there ain't a goddam thing you or anyone else can do to stop it.
What caused sea level rise in the Eemian? SUVs? What caused sea level rise in the Inter-Glacial Period before that? And the one before that? And the five others before that?
Sea level always rise during Inter-Glacial Periods. That's what's supposed to happen, and that's what's always happened, and there's never been one single time when it didn't happen.
Get over it.
When you can prove to us --- with absolute certainty -- that reducing CO2 levels to 285 ppm CO2 will not cause sea levels would not rise another 4 meters to 8 meters anyway, then we will be in the realm of science, instead of fantasy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude
The northern 100 miles of the US will likely be borderline in arability, about like Western Kansas/Eastern Colorado. The bread basket will be across the provinces, all the way to the Arctic Sea in about 100 years.
That's wishful thinking, not science.
Never in the history of Earth spanning 4.5 Billion years has it become warmer and drier. It's always warmer and wetter.
The only thing that will happen is more land will become arable land, and you cannot prove the contrary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl
I don't think AI now can be compared with automation from the past.
The first significant inroads of AI into desk/white collar/'intellectual' jobs will be within five years. The big panic and 20/20 hind vision, no more than ten.
Wow. That's soon.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
