|
And me, tomorrow is another day!
|
|
|
|
|
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
The two top categories that I feel that AI has the most beneficial use currently and in the future for the human species is:
Medical (diagnosis and optimal procedure recommendations, in particular)
Deep space exploration
Every time I think of this subject, these two categories are always at the top of the list.
There are literally thousands of non-beneficial categories and scenarios, but I won't go into those here for obvious reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: Medical
An AI model is only as good as the data fed to it. Don't we have enough bungling doctors who couldn't read an X-ray even if their own lives were at stake?
Slacker007 wrote: Deep space exploration
Yup. Keep those AIs as far as possible from the rest of us.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Deep space exploration is a great option. Personally, I'm more concerned about what the people will be doing since I would imagine we're still a generation or two away from the robot uprising. 
One thing's for sure, the economy is about to change with AI. Throughout history humans have always wanted to control others. Not all of it was bad. Some of it was, like with sl****y. But, there are quite a few directionless peeps out there that just exist. Eat, Poop, Procreate, Die. Historically, they got jobs, served the king, etc. and let someone else give them direction.
That part of human nature isn't about to change. But, what is about to change is, we're about to have billions of people no longer needed to do mundane work. They already have a few fully automatic, robotic McDonald's in existence. The backbone of any economy - truckers - will end up being self-driving and automated. And so on. It's just a matter of time.
The question is, what are we going to do with billions of directionless people once AI takes their job?
What's currently being proposed is UBI btw, which will do more harm than good but I'll elaborate on that in a different post. Curious to know other's thoughts about what we're going to do.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I have said it before and it is common sense really, but there is a political war raging right now behind the scenes over which political cabal will control AI.
That's all I am going to say, because the rest is political and I have been banned from this site twice already, I don't want a third go at it.
EVERTHING is political, even religion. AI is no exception.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: I have been banned from this site twice already, I don't want a third go at it
I have a hunch that you and I would agree on some of those taboo sentiments.
Without getting political either, I'll just say that "indoor dwellers" that never really got out of the house and thus have no real-life experience tend to worship the TV. Generally speaking, TV is less interesting people watching fake stories about people pretending to be slightly more interesting. Thus, the more boring the person, the more exciting the almighty TV. It's why kids cling to it. They're still young and learning to develop their qualities that would make them interesting and experienced.
The Internet is an extension of that. It's some people's God. The amount of people who argue online with absolutely no experience in the subject matter is crazy, for instance.
These people that never develop past that stage also need the system to think. All of us depend on the system somewhat for survival, but not all of us are mentally subservient to it. But, quite a few are, and they'll defend their master violently if needed. All because critical thinking, looking inward, and accepting reality takes a bit of inner strength.
They teach you in acting class that the goal of any show, play, etc. is to create conflict. In a movie the protagonist is supposed to overcome this conflict. However, it's the conflict that gives them reason. A purpose. Same goes for the news. Whether you're a conspiracy theorist or not, we can all agree that conflicts can be distracting.
One has to wonder if there could be anything else going in the midst of a distraction. Anyone who can't even entertain the possibility of the almighty TV being wrong or leveraged will never change. It doesn't take long to spend time doing just a bit of research to find out all of the media is controled by a few people for instance - all of it. Don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to accept that fact.
Jeremy Falcon
modified 2-Aug-23 11:09am.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: The amount of people who argue online with absolutely no experience in the subject matter is crazy, for instance.
But, but, but... xkcd: Duty Calls[^]
Jeremy Falcon wrote: It doesn't take long to spend time doing just a bit of research to find out all of the media is controled by a few people for instance - all of it. Don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to accept that fact.
You are right... you only need a working brain, and sadly common sense is not that common
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
The guy that has the YouTube channel Veritesium calculates that 30 million Americans have an IQ of 80 or less. I see no reason to suspect he is wrong. That's not a comfort.
|
|
|
|
|
I do not think that they are "that dumb" (IQ).
I just think that they are not really educated.
From all the US people I have met in my life, I observed that there were no middle way. Either they were really hardworking and learned a lot (mostly on their own) or they were damned lazy and didn't have a clue about anything.
And I see the same tendence being established in europe too. Younger generations are not being prepared properly for the future. I find it really dangerous in a such complex world like the one nowadays.
I suppose "simple" people (I repeat, I don't think people is "that dumb") is easier to manipulate and to get where the interests of the "elite" want them to go.
The other side of the coin is... if / when STHTF (Note: I am not alarmist or prepper, IMHO it is just statistic) there will be a huge decimation because people won't be able to adapt and won't have enough knowledge to survive without all what today is taken as "granted".
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Your observations about Americans I think are valid however that is only a subjective view. The guy on Varitisium he did some averaging of several IQ determining methods and from this refining of that data the dark matter, as it were, was revealed.
It does make you wonder however when the Internet makes it possible (in fact the social media algorithms help them) for the supersitious to clump together.
American's brand of capitalism would seem to encourage an empty mind to begin with. Everything in a collective sense is discouraged excepting who you vote for and what church you attend. Otherwise, they are a blank slate for marketing strategies. Americans understand this in the sense they will go out to discover what to buy, not what they need. It is not a sustainable way to run a country in my view.
If there are 30 million dumbells out there then they are going to bollocks things up when it comes to solving the importnat issues. AI may compound this too by turning several hundred million into useless members of society. That can't be good. I might be one them.
Time will be the revelator I suppose.
|
|
|
|
|
Charles Kroeger wrote: The guy on Varitisium he did some averaging of several IQ determining methods and from this refining of that data the dark matter, as it were, was revealed.
I know the guy works with a pretty nice scientific approach, but there is still a lot of dependance of the data used. I think the usage of social media decreases with the intelligence / madurity of the user. So the biggest % of people using it will fall in that average easier.
Charles Kroeger wrote: American's brand of capitalism would seem to encourage an empty mind to begin with.
Sadly not only American's... I think this really extended.
In fanatic countries it is already limited per se.
In autocratic countries, the same.
In democratic countries, it is being pushed pretty hard. As I said, dumb people is easier to manipulate.
Pick a country and you can find several examples related to that without big efford.
Charles Kroeger wrote: Americans understand this in the sense they will go out to discover what to buy, not what they need. It is not a sustainable way to run a country in my view.
Same as above... if it only were the americans... 
Charles Kroeger wrote: AI may compound this too by turning several hundred million into useless members of society.
If that happens... it will be the start of the end.
From all the people I know without something meaningful to do, the biggest part have either psychological, alcohol, drugs problems or all at once. We are not done to stay idle for long periods of time, it is not healthy.
Charles Kroeger wrote: Time will be the revelator I suppose.
For sure... the question is... what will it reveal?
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
"The amount of people who argue online with absolutely no experience in the subject matter is crazy, for instance."
Present company excepted, naturally, as always. One is above the common fray.
|
|
|
|
|
Wrong. I speak of things I know about. I suggest you end your little tirade right now.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: what are we going to do with billions of directionless people once AI takes their job?
revolutions, wars, mutual annihilation.
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
|
|
|
|
|
Substitute "looms" for "AI" and your fear sounds rather familiar.
|
|
|
|
|
That’s a very accurate observation. Totally agree.
Willing to bet the reason violence used to be so prevalent was due to boredom. Now we have jobs, video games, and TV to “feed” us.
Right one of those things is teaching war. If a second one is removed like jobs… gonna be a lot of bored people again.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, all those people who made buggy whips, horseshoes, and stage coaches were homeless and unemployed after that evil Henry Ford starting building automobiles!
|
|
|
|
|
I've been musing over how AI will control even more of Investment Management (when compared with the computer models used to manage investments). As AI controls more of businesses, and AI controls more of the investments into (and out of) those businesses I'm very curious to see what the results will be.
I also am thinking how it will become even more difficult to raise children - already very difficult with today's technology.
|
|
|
|
|
AI will even influence how we think about money. Ever since the humanity thought up of trading something of value, whether it be a rock or a goat, for something else they considered valuable... money (goats are a form of monney) has always centered around the idea of intrinsic value.
If UBI (Universal Basic Income) is the idea floating around to address tons of people being out of jobs due to AI. Forget the start of it, imagine the next 1,000 years of people getting used to getting money for nothing. The next round of new politicians will always promise new crap. Just like any other fake momentary system it gets out of hand. Then we end up with an inflated UBI based on people doing nothing for it (except giving up their freedom, but I digress).
Which means, future money will have no intrinsic value. Which is impossible. Which means money will be a concept of the past, in the way we see it now. Also, curious to know how that would affect investments if we have no concept of money (value).
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Which means, future money will have no intrinsic value. Which is impossible. Which means money will be a concept of the past, in the way we see it now. Also, curious to know how that would affect investments if we have no concept of money (value).
A nice Utopia is the way Star Trek "world" works
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I know I’m gonna lose nerd pints here, but I don’t know how that works. Can you elaborate?
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
https://gamerant.com/star-trek-why-world-without-currency-way-forward/[^]
Sorry, too lazy to write it down...
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh snap... I'll have to check it out after work. VPN issues and all that. Thanks man.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
You are welcome.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
