Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd like to know some of the ideas for how to address this loss of jobs. Do we need some sort of "paradigm shift" in our thinking about the nature of economics?
This conversation would be more interesting than nano computers in my brain. (Not that I could add anything to the conversation, and maybe no one can. That part of the future kind of freaks me out tho'.)
This conversation would be more interesting than nano computers in my brain. (Not that I could add anything to the conversation, and maybe no one can. That part of the future kind of freaks me out tho'.)
Yeah, I'm trying to read up on this too.
What I have understood is that
A) Capitalism is basically 'taking something', adding 'work' and making that item better. Sell it.
This works because you can sell the something at a higher price than you bought it for + the cost of work.
B) This won't function (any more) if automation makes "work" cost close to zero, where is your benefit and don't even think about paying a worker as company "B" on the other side of town automates everything.
It isn't a bad thing though, some say it will even create abundance.
But automation will create social unrest (because of massive unemployment) and that will (hopefully) force decision makers to create something like Basic Income.
If there might not be concious machines (at all, say) wouldn't that only change the 'upload your brain to a (silicon) machine' problem?
If a machine think it is concious but isn't (...), wouldn't that make the machine non-concious but as productive as a human for example?
My point was that without a theory of consciousness, we don't have a basis for making plausible predictions. Exponential increases in processing power, alone, might not be enough for sentience, and sentience might be necessary for general intelligence. I personally suspect that a machine with sufficiently high processing power will exhibit intelligent behavior, even if it is not sentient, but it's possible that intelligence without sentience is a lot harder than we imagine. Without good theories to guide us, we are really just making guesses about all of this. My guess is that we probably will have non-conscious AI by 2020, with or without a theory of consciousness to guide us, and then, if we don't have a theory yet, perhaps the AI can help us find one by 2030, with something like the Singularity happening shortly thereafter.
My point was that without a theory of consciousness, we don't have a basis for making plausible predictions. Exponential increases in processing power, alone, might not be enough for sentience, and sentience might be necessary for general intelligence. I personally suspect that a machine with sufficiently high processing power will exhibit intelligent behavior, even if it is not sentient, but it's possible that intelligence without sentience is a lot harder than we imagine. Without good theories to guide us, we are really just making guesses about all of this. My guess is that we probably will have non-conscious AI by 2020, with or without a theory of consciousness to guide us, and then, if we don't have a theory yet, perhaps the AI can help us find one by 2030, with something like the Singularity happening shortly thereafter.
A good example as to why I think the singularity will happen around 2035.
I also think that reverse ageing will come soon. I might be slightly more moderate about it though, say quite sure in 20 years, starting before with treatments like this one.
A shame the professor doesn't speak more about how they did it, usually people (who know what they are talking about) seems to think that tinkering with metabolism and selecting genes/gene expressions etc. might make the medium lifespan longer but not the maximum lifespan (which is around 120 years) and not really reverse old age.
So it comes off a bit, IMO, as a FoundRaiserBait...
Please tell me I'm wrong !
My bet goes with SENS even if they have a hard time to get that Roubust Mouse Rejuvenation, I bet it'll come in 5-10 years and then another 5-10 years for humans (maybe a bit more to make it cheap and mainstream).
A bit long and those "famous" "slides" are missing but IMO one of the most promising things today (Bionics)
They are giving rough timeframes and it feels like they will have the solution to one of the gaps in A2P in a year or so (the 1024 cubes) anyway I'm really impressed...
This isn't intended for human use but for research but again, I bet that a functional liver is around the corner.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
!
