We could explore space, make new jobs in other planets, and kill bad aliens.

Essentially whatever the Forerunners do with their AIs.

Not to sound technocist or whatever the correct term would be, I would never trust a robot to perform surgery on me. Maybe an actual adaptable and learning AI, but never a pre-programmed robot.

The robot is better than humans.

Quote from: True Velox on September 25, 2014, 08:30:34 AM

Not to sound technocist or whatever the correct term would be, I would never trust a robot to perform surgery on me. Maybe an actual adaptable and learning AI, but never a pre-programmed robot.

The robot is better than humans.

An AI might be, but a robot is an automaton. They can't adapt to unexpected situations. If something happens while I'm on the surgery table I wouldn't want the robot to continue without a care in the world.

Quote from: True Velox on September 25, 2014, 10:05:50 AM

An AI might be, but a robot is an automaton. They can't adapt to unexpected situations. If something happens while I'm on the surgery table I wouldn't want the robot to continue without a care in the world.

Well, it isn't a dichotomy, there's a massive gap between an artificial general intelligence and a mindless drone. The robots we have now, while not AGIs, are exceedingly intelligent. I'm not saying the surgeon robot might be better than humans, I'm fairly confident it already is in the same fashion automated cars are already better than drivers.

I'm not sure if Watson - the robot - has actually been put to genuine surgery yet, however, I'm merely stating it is most definitely superior to humans. And when you say artificial intelligence? Watson constitutes an AI.

EDIT: Hue, my bad, Watson is a doctor, not a surgeon.

Well, that's different then. As long as it (he? they?) can adapt and learn, and isn't just executing pre-programmed tasks.

Well, that's different then. As long as it (he? they?) can adapt and learn, and isn't just executing pre-programmed tasks.

Well, of course it's executing pre-programmed tasks. How could it not? It just isn't programmed to act mindlessly and continue performing a series of events. It's programmed to learn and adapt and change to different situations.

I think the main problem would be the human aspect. A machine may be better, smarter and more precise than any surgeon, but it lacks humanity and may make decisions no human doctor would. It may not understand human emotions or needs such as keeping someone alive for the family to say goodbye, or may make very cold and calculated decisions, such as not saving a person because the younger, healthier person next door would be a perfect match for a liver transplant.

Not saying I disapprove of a future with robots or AI performing surgeries, but these are things to be taken into account if more and more jobs end up being taken over by machines.

Those considerations aren't "human". Merely ethical.

If doctors can operate under a code of ethics, then I don't see why artificial intelligences cannot.

I can certainly see a case for keeping the judicial system human. For the same reasons we want our politicians, police officers and soldiers human, and the ones you listed above.

The point is, automation will certainly streamline the legal profession, but it will also depress the demand for lawyers will which yield lower wages and fewer people who actually become lawyers. I'm not saying the legal system will become absolutely and fully automated (although it wouldn't surprise me), I'm saying it's going to seriously take a hit in terms of employment, which is what the thread is about.

Not to mention, the legal system is heavily dependent on the socio-economic system. If we do end up in a world where all production and most services are automated, I see little need for contracts or private property.

I also disagree with you on the ability for a robot to be a judge, however undesirable that might be, but it's largely besides the point so I won't pursue it.

Quote from: Meta Cognition on September 25, 2014, 10:24:38 AM

Those considerations aren't "human". Merely ethical.

If doctors can operate under a code of ethics, then I don't see why artificial intelligences cannot.

Perhaps you are right, although I still feel that certain decisions should be up to humans. Replacing all surgeons with AI that end up being supervised by medical professionals who make the tough calls just seems like a better idea to me.

I've no doubt that will be an intermediary stage. I'm just convinced that, following such a situation, it would be eventually phased out.

I don't find that particularly desirable, merely inevitable.

I never see that happening. When we are so advanced that robots are gathering all the materials, creating all our wants and needs, then pampering us during our wants and needs, humanity has transcended.

It's all philosophy and the arts from there on. Exploration.

Become technocrats and submit to the superlative form of idealism. Either that or recognize that AI are the superior forms of existence and actually put the decision up to them.

Also, if all goes well, I'm looking to specialize my potential Comp Sci degree with AI. You can Goji for a jobless future!

heheheheh