Live data from Hacker News

At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer

wsj.com

191–195 of 195 posts

Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer

#191
post #14

There's a lot believers in technological unemployment here on HN and one thing I think that viewpoint misses is just how darn resilient humans are to changes in the economy. In the past 150 years, we've seen human manual labor replaced by mechanical labor. Think about that -- a lot of early California settlers walked here, and now you're commanding power roughly equivalent to 100 horses when you hop into your car. Ag…

True. Humans definitely will find a way to figure out what to do next if AI takes away lot of jobs. But the important thing is that the rate of which these jobs go. With the recent advances in deep learning or AI in general, the rate of loss of jobs across manufacturing, logistics, agriculture or construction is way more and i don't think we are ready to do something about it.

"rate of loss of jobs across ... construction"

Where are you getting that information???

"Skilled labor shortage will continue to plague construction companies" [1]

1. http://www.constructiondive.com/news/10-construction-industr...

Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer

#193
post #127
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Except history has never had to content with automation and AI It's taken me awhile to wrap my head around this. I think I'm starting to understand the fundamental difference. In the past technology revolutionized processes. E.g. Replace horse with trains and cars. But, the human skills were never touched--they all required a driver. Whereas today, technology is reaching the point of replacing human skills. E.g. au…

Air brakes replaced human breakers on trains.

The decision to brake was always made by the engineer.

Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer

#194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Machines are bad at transferring domain knowledge and generalizing/making unconventional linkages between topics -- what some would regard as creativity, they're also not going to be very good at empathy without essentially solving for strong AI and regularized data on human emotions -- there also are going to be human jobs because of protectionist instincts. ex: A machine right now would actually probably do a more…

I think we agree on the larger point, just to the degree of the damage. I think I'm on a 7.5, you might be on a 9 in terms of damage AI can do to employment.

When I wrote my comment I was thinking long term (e.g. decades). Regardless, the disruption is going to be sufficient enough to force us to redefine our economy.

Re: At Davos, IBM Chief Predicts Artificial Intelligence Won’t Be a Job Killer

#195
post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are incredibly simple to use if you follow the 3 instructions. But hey, people can't even signal when turning reliable, of course a lot of people are going to have problems with these machines.

I assure you, I can reliably signal turn. I also assure you that any time an item fails to scan on the first swipe, it accuses me of being either an idiot, or a thief.

Really? Mine just say scan and put item in bag.

You have some might fine AI machines ;)

Post reply on HN