Welcoming Our New Robotic Overlords • Hacker News Board

Re: Welcoming Our New Robotic Overlords

#41

Post by jpindar » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 7:41 PM UTC

thriftwy wrote: post #2

I think that soon it will be considered a bad practice to possess a skill or to use some knowledge for decisions.. If you have learned to do something, you will proceed by teaching a machine learning system that. And then you will use that, and not your internal knowledge. The reason will be cited as follows: If you know something, this introduces bus factor. People can't get in your head to validate if you're applyi…

A lot of businesses now don't care about their bus factor, I don't see why that would change.

Re: Welcoming Our New Robotic Overlords

#42

Post by svachalek » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 8:11 PM UTC

indigochill wrote: post #23

stefie10 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started working in robotics because I wanted to empower people and make the world a better place. But what I have started to appreciate is that increasing automation is by default a transfer of wealth from labor to capital owners. The two million long-haul truck drivers who are going to be replaced by self-driving trucks are going to lose income; the owners of the self-driving trucks are going to capture that wealt…

Although I agree automation necessarily moves wealth from labor to capital sources, I think an underappreciated concept by those concerned about automation is how increased productivity at least historically has benefited the overall economy. The industrial revolution went a long way towards advancing economic inequality, but had it not happened we collectively wouldn't enjoy anywhere near the quality of life we now…

You have to think about how it benefits the overall economy. Typically this has been by replacing menial, low-paying jobs with more leveraged and better paying ones. But in the industrial age these upgrades were still creating jobs the average person could train for in a few months, and then follow for the rest of their working life.

But there's no guarantee anywhere that this is how it "has" to work out, and as things accelerate there's a lot of evidence to say it's not going to be that way for working class people in highly developed economies. (It seems to be ramping up developing economies much the same as it worked for us.) If you don't have a paycheck, are you really benefitting from the "overall economy"?

Re: Welcoming Our New Robotic Overlords

#43

Post by knicholes » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 8:46 PM UTC

mholmes680 wrote: post #33

s_kilk wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would effectively freeze all development and leave us collectively stuck at the current level of expertise. If every doctor trains an ML algo, then forgets how to be a doctor, then medicine stops dead at that level.

i dunno... i just read about alphago zero. Only needed to teach it the rules of the game, and it thrashed the current level of cumulative human expertise (alpha go) 100-0 matches, which had just thrashed a single human the year before. This seems like its happening at some hedge funds as well for stock picking. I guess the closed system of the game rules is more manageable than all of medicine, but... I can't agree w…

I wasn't able to determine from what I read yesterday if AlphaGo Zero played vs AlphaGo or vs itself (AlphaGo Zero). This probably isn't the place to ask, but if it is, do you know?

Re: Welcoming Our New Robotic Overlords

#44

Post by nschucher » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 8:53 PM UTC

knicholes wrote: post #43

mholmes680 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i dunno... i just read about alphago zero. Only needed to teach it the rules of the game, and it thrashed the current level of cumulative human expertise (alpha go) 100-0 matches, which had just thrashed a single human the year before. This seems like its happening at some hedge funds as well for stock picking. I guess the closed system of the game rules is more manageable than all of medicine, but... I can't agree w…

I wasn't able to determine from what I read yesterday if AlphaGo Zero played vs AlphaGo or vs itself (AlphaGo Zero). This probably isn't the place to ask, but if it is, do you know?

It was trained with self-play and evaluated on AlphaGo Lee (the version that beat Lee Sedol) and AlphaGo Master (the version that beat Ke Jie and I believe a number of online matches against top-ranked professional players).

Re: Welcoming Our New Robotic Overlords

#45

Post by marcosdumay » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 8:59 PM UTC

stefie10 wrote: post #20

boundring wrote: post #16

The article is focused on robotic automation of menial tasks, primarily in industrial settings (factories, warehouses), not automation of judgements which could be subject to bias... Thriftwy raises an interesting point, speculatively, but there's little bias to be found in supply logistics or assembly of parts. Marginally touched upon in the article was the displacement of lower-class workers. Is expansion of automa…

I started working in robotics because I wanted to empower people and make the world a better place. But what I have started to appreciate is that increasing automation is by default a transfer of wealth from labor to capital owners. The two million long-haul truck drivers who are going to be replaced by self-driving trucks are going to lose income; the owners of the self-driving trucks are going to capture that wealt…

> increasing automation is by default a transfer of wealth from labor to capital owners

Things are more complex than that. Whether labor gains or loses depends it productivity saves labor faster or slower than lower prices increase consumption.

Re: Welcoming Our New Robotic Overlords

#46

Post by crdoconnor » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 9:45 PM UTC

stefie10 wrote: post #20

boundring wrote: post #16

The article is focused on robotic automation of menial tasks, primarily in industrial settings (factories, warehouses), not automation of judgements which could be subject to bias... Thriftwy raises an interesting point, speculatively, but there's little bias to be found in supply logistics or assembly of parts. Marginally touched upon in the article was the displacement of lower-class workers. Is expansion of automa…

I started working in robotics because I wanted to empower people and make the world a better place. But what I have started to appreciate is that increasing automation is by default a transfer of wealth from labor to capital owners. The two million long-haul truck drivers who are going to be replaced by self-driving trucks are going to lose income; the owners of the self-driving trucks are going to capture that wealt…

https://qz.com/962427/what-its-like-to-be-a-modern-engraver-...

"The relatively steady rate of employment in etching and engraving fits into the optimist’s narrative of what will happen when machines take over work. Unlike the pessimist’s narrative, which points out the instances in which companies view automation as an opportunity to cut labor costs, the sunny view assumes that there’s always more work to do. If workers aren’t bogged down with repetitive, boring tasks, they’ll be able to do more work or focus on new business segments.

“A lot of the automation has just made it faster, not necessarily taken away jobs,” says Dalton. “For us, I would say it’s increased our capability to hire more employees, because we can do more work.”

Coincidentally, the whole magic robots stealing jobs meme neatly exculpates austerity and outsourcing.

Re: Welcoming Our New Robotic Overlords

#47

Post by AOsborn » Thu, Oct 19, 2017, 9:53 PM UTC

stefie10 wrote: post #20

boundring wrote: post #16

The article is focused on robotic automation of menial tasks, primarily in industrial settings (factories, warehouses), not automation of judgements which could be subject to bias... Thriftwy raises an interesting point, speculatively, but there's little bias to be found in supply logistics or assembly of parts. Marginally touched upon in the article was the displacement of lower-class workers. Is expansion of automa…

I started working in robotics because I wanted to empower people and make the world a better place. But what I have started to appreciate is that increasing automation is by default a transfer of wealth from labor to capital owners. The two million long-haul truck drivers who are going to be replaced by self-driving trucks are going to lose income; the owners of the self-driving trucks are going to capture that wealt…

> But what I have started to appreciate is that increasing automation is by default a transfer of wealth from labor to capital owners.

I think this is correct. However, one aspect not yet covered in the media as much is that if wealth is concentrated and dispossessed from labour classes, there will be a corresponding decline or collapse in many areas of the economy.

If an entire generation of labour workers are tipped out of employment, who will purchase FMCG? Sure, the market for premium/elite products could increase but I do not think this will compensate nearly enough for the lack of volume.

It is in the interest of capital owners to ensure that significant markets remain so that industries that rely on economy of scale can continue to operate. Basic income doesn't help this situation.

Re: Welcoming Our New Robotic Overlords

#48

Post by contingencies » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 1:31 AM UTC

Danihan wrote: post #39

goatlover wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is no camera and no police, you can run treat the light as a stoplight. Just be safe about it. By can, I mean that a human being can choose to do so. Maybe smart cars in the future won't allow the driver to make that decision. But nothing forces us to always obey traffic laws right now.

Enforcement is just a technicality.

In China and many other countries, rules are typically so numerous, draconian or fuzzy that you are nominally constantly breaking something. If the authorities want to alter your behavior, they call in the specter of potential enforcement to encourage behavioral change. On the one hand this seems horrible - shifting sands, constant unknowns, zero security - but in reality it's kind of liberating - less need to hire lawyers and asking for forgiveness is tolerated. The gap between enforcement and law is precisely where most people seek to operate, because it typically creates additional efficiencies. In short, enforcement is law. Or to rephrase this in the words of Snowden - Policy is a one-way ratchet that only loosens over time.

Re: Welcoming Our New Robotic Overlords

#49

Post by rgarrett88 » Fri, Oct 20, 2017, 2:41 AM UTC

AOsborn wrote: post #47

stefie10 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started working in robotics because I wanted to empower people and make the world a better place. But what I have started to appreciate is that increasing automation is by default a transfer of wealth from labor to capital owners. The two million long-haul truck drivers who are going to be replaced by self-driving trucks are going to lose income; the owners of the self-driving trucks are going to capture that wealt…

> But what I have started to appreciate is that increasing automation is by default a transfer of wealth from labor to capital owners. I think this is correct. However, one aspect not yet covered in the media as much is that if wealth is concentrated and dispossessed from labour classes, there will be a corresponding decline or collapse in many areas of the economy. If an entire generation of labour workers are tippe…

I don't think we'll have a lack of volume. Global incomes continue to rise and push demand higher. Often times developing economies' growth comes at the expense of developed but on the whole it's net positive.