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

Brain work may be going the way of manual work

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 75 posts

Re: Brain work may be going the way of manual work

#11

Post by Ilverin »

Aardwolf wrote: post #3

"Moore’s law—that the computing power available for a given price doubles about every 18 months—continues to apply. " Then why are Intel desktop CPU's not getting any better the last 3 years?

The "Moore's Law" used in the article "that the computing power available for a given price doubles about every 18 months" is correct, but it is a slight redefinition of the actual "Moore's Law".

In any case, the costs are going down, the number of cores are growing, and, more importantly, computing power is not restricted to CPUs (see GPUs/APUs).

Re: Brain work may be going the way of manual work

#13

Post by moarzLaw »

sliverstorm wrote: post #6
Aardwolf wrote: post #3

"Moore’s law—that the computing power available for a given price doubles about every 18 months—continues to apply. " Then why are Intel desktop CPU's not getting any better the last 3 years?

Because the article, like just about damn everyone else, completely misunderstands Moore's law, which actually observes that the number of transistors we can fit on a chip doubles every two years. Transistor count does not directly correlate to performance.

Wrong again. Moore's law is actually not any kind of law at all.

It's merely a business practice adopted by Intel, which they attempt to adhere to. The fact that they refer to it as a law, and that journalists around the world parrot their term, is all merely a magical marketing sales pitch.

They TRY to double the transistor count on a periodic basis, and, when they do, suddenly, they've got a newer, better, more expensive thing to market and sell. Wowee! The future is such a miracle!

Re: Brain work may be going the way of manual work

#14

Post by Aardwolf »

mapleoin wrote: post #8
Aardwolf wrote: post #3

"Moore’s law—that the computing power available for a given price doubles about every 18 months—continues to apply. " Then why are Intel desktop CPU's not getting any better the last 3 years?

you misread computing power as CPU clock speed

No I didn't. Intel desktop CPUs did not gain a significant amount of computing power the last 3 years. Compare 1995 CPUs to 1998. Now compare 2010 CPUs to 2013.

Re: Brain work may be going the way of manual work

#15

Post by nostromo »

kybernetyk wrote: post #4
3pt14159 wrote: post #2

No they will not. The amount of effort required to shrink real knowledge worker jobs is astronomical compared to simply driving a car. After the singularity, fine. But even that will require a massive, massive amount of work. The low hanging fruit for increasing knowledge work output is in Gattaca not AI.

I guess the point where an AI can replace a programmer is the point where a technological singularity begins. Because at that point the AI is capable of improving its own code which would lead to a 'runaway reaction'. And if you're in a post-singularity world you don't really have to worry about jobs anymore. So I guess being a programmer is pretty future proof ;)

Software is already replacing programmers through gains in efficiency if not AI.

Just look at what a small number of programmers can accomplish today vs 10 or 20 years ago.

Re: Brain work may be going the way of manual work

#16

Post by bsenftner »

It's the finance and legal professions that are most at risk with the current level of AI and machine learning. Contrary to what most finance and legal professionals believe, there is low creativity in their vocations - and that is exactly what AI and machine learning does best: wrote procedural operations from a complex set of rules. This will be very interesting to see how our "captains of corruption" (the fucks that actually run this planet) react when they are pushed to the curb.

Re: Brain work may be going the way of manual work

#17

Post by aespinoza »

w1ntermute wrote: post #10
aespinoza wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, I couldn't read the article due to the paywall. But I agree with you. I don't think AI will replace knowledge workers. A couple of decades ago, people used to say that workers in factories would disappear as well. That never happened, at least not completely. The costs are always a problem. If AI will ever really replace us, is still a mystery for the future. Because for it to work, it would have to be cost ef…

> Sadly, I couldn't read the article due to the paywall. Just open it in Incognito Mode. The Economist uses a simple, cookie-based porous paywall.

Thanks for the tip. It worked.

Re: Brain work may be going the way of manual work

#18

Post by mindcrime »

FWIW, this sounds a lot like Schumpeterian (or Marxist) "creative destruction" at play. The idea of "creative destruction" is an interesting one, and it's an area of much debate in regards to the long-term viability of the capitalist model.

The key idea of "creative destruction" is basically that technological innovation both creates (duh) and destroys (in that it destroys economic value based on pre-innovation technologies). And since - in Schumpeter's view anyway - capitalism depends on a constant flow of new innovations and entrerpeneurship, we have a constant state of churn where value is being "creatively destroyed".

I started reading Josesph Schumpeter's Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy[2] a while back but got distracted and never finished it - but based on what I know so far, I recommend it. What I'm not yet clear on, from my limited reading of the original source material, and a few related works, is exactly how bullish (or not) Schumpeter was on capitalism. Which reminds me, I really want to go back and finish the book, as I find this topic both fascinating and important.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction

[2]:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism,_Socialism_and_Democ...

Re: Brain work may be going the way of manual work

#19

Post by icebraining »

moarzLaw wrote: post #13
sliverstorm wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the article, like just about damn everyone else, completely misunderstands Moore's law, which actually observes that the number of transistors we can fit on a chip doubles every two years. Transistor count does not directly correlate to performance.

Wrong again. Moore's law is actually not any kind of law at all. It's merely a business practice adopted by Intel, which they attempt to adhere to. The fact that they refer to it as a law, and that journalists around the world parrot their term, is all merely a magical marketing sales pitch. They TRY to double the transistor count on a periodic basis, and, when they do, suddenly, they've got a newer, better, more exp…

"Moore's law" is the name, it doesn't matter if it's a real law or not.

Re: Brain work may be going the way of manual work

#20

Post by nwenzel »

While I doubt there will be some Reverse Big Bang of creative destruction, it's tough to argue that the need for knowledge workers is being reduced. In theory, even Excel reduces the need for knowledge workers by allowing a single analyst to produce more output that an analyst with graph paper.

My question to HN-ers, as people who write code that further reduces the need for knowledge workers, how should we feel about our role in contributing to a Vonnegut-style dystopia?

Indifference? If not us, someone else will do it. And job loss isn't really a net loss. It's just capital reallocating to another area.

Pride? Automation brings advances down in price point creating a better standard of living for all.

Something else?

edit: The "need" for knowledge workers isn't reduced. I stated that incorrectly. I meant that fewer knowledge workers are needed for a given task or given output. Clearly, the need for knowledge workers as a pct of the workforce is higher than in the past and will continue to do so until the machines take over.

Post reply on HN