Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Humans are underrated

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 50 posts

Re: Humans are underrated

#21

Post by danieltillett »

agumonkey wrote: post #17
danieltillett wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The oldest profession is not going to be replaced with robots until those robots are mistakable for humans, as in Blade Runner. I am not so sure about this. When you consider what is the current alternative to the oldest profession then I think robots will achieve a high penetration.

It will be an uncanny valley. Better reading 50 shades of gray than playing with a Boston Dynamic doll. It would surely sell though, people are actually buying expensive dolls, I'm sure some of them would be tempted by a hugdroid.

I think social acceptance is likely to be the bigger holdback.

50 shades is an interesting example of this effect. Women supposedly weren’t interested in this area (not my personal experience), but get enough social acceptance and even an appallingly badly written book becomes a popular success.

Sex robots will face the same “icky” effect, but all it will take for them to become popular is social acceptance via a breakout event once they become good enough.

Re: Humans are underrated

#22

Post by aaron695 »

lordnacho wrote: post #7

The article touches on the major areas: - Jobs where we need someone to be responsible. You may have fancy diagnostic computers and automated scalpels, but you are going to want a doctor somewhere. A NLP algo might be faster, more accurate, and better at recalling old cases than a judge, but you're not going to be satisfied in a society where you open a website to find out whether you're going to jail. - Jobs where i…

> The oldest profession is not going to be replaced with robots until those robots are mistakable for humans

It already has. It's the internet. Sex crimes go down when internet access goes up. It hasn't 'replaced' it 100% but that's the point with a lot of this stuff it is slowly reducing jobs without creating new ones.

I really don't think it'd be impossible to create a machine that cuts hair. Or making coloring hair at home/in salons easier.

Even if it's augmented by a human if it's 50% more efficient there might go half the jobs. Use robots so the staff need little to no training. Hair cuts would be cheaper so demand would go up, but jobs will still go.

In a failing economy paying to have your hair cut is an unnecessary expense. Things can start to fall pretty quick.

Re: Humans are underrated

#23

Post by agumonkey »

danieltillett wrote: post #21
agumonkey wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will be an uncanny valley. Better reading 50 shades of gray than playing with a Boston Dynamic doll. It would surely sell though, people are actually buying expensive dolls, I'm sure some of them would be tempted by a hugdroid.

I think social acceptance is likely to be the bigger holdback. 50 shades is an interesting example of this effect. Women supposedly weren’t interested in this area (not my personal experience), but get enough social acceptance and even an appallingly badly written book becomes a popular success. Sex robots will face the same “icky” effect, but all it will take for them to become popular is social acceptance via a bre…

I think it's a deeper personal reaction, not a social thing, you're confronted with something close to a human that is not one. It won't work unless for a few people.

Re: Humans are underrated

#24

Post by x5n1 »

agumonkey wrote: post #18

Maybe the 'add value' paradigm can go to sleep. Maybe life could (should) be seen as something more than production. The existentialistic view on 'work' bothers me a bit

I was watching a show, Orange Is the New Black, and it occurred to me how easy it is to get people in line to serve any sort of agenda. All you need to do is control the things people might want. Once you do that everyone just falls in line to do whatever you want. They will spend their days toiling away at whatever idiotic agenda you have come up for them. And it occurred to me all of society is like that.

A few people control all of the resources, and we are in line to do their bidding and drive the entire system. Without these people we'd just be either hunter gatherers or farmers. With these people in charge we're just there to do their bidding. The bad part of all of this is the progenitors of these ideas are long dead, but the system that they created chugs along continuing to make us do what they wanted to do in the first place.

The people who control the resources don't even know why they do what they do. They do it because that's how things are done. It's the right and moral thing to do.

Re: Humans are underrated

#25

Post by Hermel »

x5n1 wrote: post #24
agumonkey wrote: post #18

Maybe the 'add value' paradigm can go to sleep. Maybe life could (should) be seen as something more than production. The existentialistic view on 'work' bothers me a bit

I was watching a show, Orange Is the New Black, and it occurred to me how easy it is to get people in line to serve any sort of agenda. All you need to do is control the things people might want. Once you do that everyone just falls in line to do whatever you want. They will spend their days toiling away at whatever idiotic agenda you have come up for them. And it occurred to me all of society is like that. A few peo…

This observation holds in environments where the resources are tangible and controllable by force (i.e. owning the only oasis in the area or controlling oil fields). It does not hold in decentralized environments in which people can create value on their own.

Re: Humans are underrated

#26

Post by x5n1 »

Hermel wrote: post #25
x5n1 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was watching a show, Orange Is the New Black, and it occurred to me how easy it is to get people in line to serve any sort of agenda. All you need to do is control the things people might want. Once you do that everyone just falls in line to do whatever you want. They will spend their days toiling away at whatever idiotic agenda you have come up for them. And it occurred to me all of society is like that. A few peo…

This observation holds in environments where the resources are tangible and controllable by force (i.e. owning the only oasis in the area or controlling oil fields). It does not hold in decentralized environments in which people can create value on their own.

Ever heard of break out of the 9-5 jail? The 4 hour work week? And other things that are possible, but difficult to highly unlikely in a highly competitive system where most of the capital is held by a few who make employees of those are looking to be free. Entrepreneurs usually end up as employees of those with capital and if they work really really hard and get really really lucky. They can leave the jail and enjoy how much ever little time they have left.

Re: Humans are underrated

#27

Post by zitterbewegung »

What happens when we create a "computer" that doesn't have to be sentient but is good enough to do the following things

- Manage a company.

- Complete tasks that have value.

- Follow all laws.

This would be a corporate entity sort of like the automated bitcoin entities but instead it would be a corporate entity that is dependant on the following. - Can it power itself

- Will its check clear for the next month since it has to power itself

- The things the computer can't do can it hire an outside contractor to do it.

Re: Humans are underrated

#28

Post by delinka »

david-given wrote: post #20
lordnacho wrote: post #7

The article touches on the major areas: - Jobs where we need someone to be responsible. You may have fancy diagnostic computers and automated scalpels, but you are going to want a doctor somewhere. A NLP algo might be faster, more accurate, and better at recalling old cases than a judge, but you're not going to be satisfied in a society where you open a website to find out whether you're going to jail. - Jobs where i…

ELIZA is, or at least was, actually used as a therapeutic tool: people would spend hours over a terminal, 'talking' to it. It worked because ELIZA wasn't a human and wasn't judgemental --- there was nobody actually there. And ELIZA is possibly the least convincing chatbot of all time. So I can totally see how removing humans from the loop in certain jobs could be really successful. You mention doctors: I totally want…

"ELIZA [was] actually used as a therapeutic tool"

Can you provide a reference for this? I've only ever seen it referred to as a toy, an oddity; never an actual tool.

Re: Humans are underrated

#29

Post by Asbostos »

lordnacho wrote: post #7

The article touches on the major areas: - Jobs where we need someone to be responsible. You may have fancy diagnostic computers and automated scalpels, but you are going to want a doctor somewhere. A NLP algo might be faster, more accurate, and better at recalling old cases than a judge, but you're not going to be satisfied in a society where you open a website to find out whether you're going to jail. - Jobs where i…

Paradoxically, they say we want people because they're accountable. At the same time the show that parole judges are consistently making wrong decisions. But they're presumably not being held accountable. Sure we feel nice imagining there's accountability, but in some professions it's only an illusion. The same goes for doctors in some countries. They can get away with carelessly killing a patient. There isn't real accountability there.

Even when there genuinely is accountability like drivers and pilots who pay for their mistakes with their lives, it doesn't stop them making careless mistakes. I seem to remember that pilot error is the cause of the majority of plane crashes. It certainly is for car crashes too.

Re: Humans are underrated

#30

Post by ExpiredLink »

There is a slight contradiction in this line of argument. Why are currently more people of the total population employed than ever (at least in industrialized countries) and not less? Housewife isn't an option for women any more. All available human resources are seemingly needed to sustain the economy. Where are the robots which do everything better?
Post reply on HN