Slashdot Mirror
Bill Gates: AI Is The 'Holy Grail' (mashable.com)
An anonymous reader writes: At the Code Conference on Wednesday, Bill Gates balanced his fears of artificial intelligence with praise. He talked about two of the challenges AI will pose: a loss of existing jobs, and making sure humans remain in control of super-intelligent machines. Gates, as well as many other experts in the field, predict there will be an excess of labor resources as robots and AI systems take over. He plans to talk with others about ideas to combat the threat of AI controlling humans, specifically noting work being done at Stanford. Even with such threats, Gates called AI the "holy grail" as he envisions a future "with machines that are capable and more capable than human intelligence." Gates said, "We've made more progress in the last five years than at any time in history. [...] The dream is finally arriving. This is what it was all leading up to."
Loss of jobs is the big one. An AI is not only not capable of killing humans, but would have nothing to gain from killing the people who maintain it. On the other hand, poor and unemployed people with nothing to lose will tear our society apart if that part grows large enough (as has been demonstrated numerous times throughout history) and I fear nobody seems to be taking this situation seriously. We need to find an alternative way to structure our society, and quickly, if we want AI that does all our work for us.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
Currency is an abstraction of labor, we use it to manage the effort put into things during trade - it's a lot more convenient than carrying around four cows and a goat. So, robots come along and take all the jobs? Well, no more scarcity of labor. And the systems of currency and capitalism we have grown so far get upended. They won't go out the window but they will see massive restructurings. If labor is not scarce, want a house? Go pick one down the street where the machines built fifty of them. Free. Because there was no scarce labor involved. Capitalism? Well, in a post scarcity economy the invisible hand that makes it go remains to be seen how that adapts. In the short term however, say ten to thirty years, a transition system where perhaps everyone gets a guaranteed minimum income until our society fully adapts to machines could help to minimize social upheaval over the machines taking all the jobs.
Shh.
"AI is the holy grail" - Bill Gates, 2016
"Two years from now, spam will be solved" - Bill Gates, 2004
"640K ought to be enough for anybody." - Bill Gates, 1981
Given the outcome of Gates' previous predictions, I think it's safe to presume that AI is and will never be the holy grail.
"Bill Gates"
"Expert in the field"
malicious snickering... :)
Free, clean energy is. AI means the oligarchs get to remove more jobs from the masses, thus increasing suppression of dissent (until forced into revolution); but limitless energy means the world's population can all live far better lives regardless of where they're located. Water can be purified allowing food to be grown where it's cost prohibitive now, migration will slow down when the third world can live like the so-called first.
Well, I think he's right. And he's actually one of those people with enough experience to say this, since programming doesn't require pesky interaction with the real world like, say, automated cars do, humans obviously suck at programming big time, and Gates is one of those people who have seen thousands of people suck big time at programming over multiple decades. So your argument actually supports him. Maybe that's the whole reason why he's so optimistic about making people redundant in the first place!
I think Bill Gates is a prick and his opinion on anything doesn't mean shit. It's okay with him if AI's take over peoples jobs, he doesn't have to worry about feeding his family when he can't get a job because AI's/robots are doing all the jobs you can get.
Be seeing you...
"[...] more capable than human intelligence [...]"
I just can't understand all this nonsense some high profile people are talking about regarding AI these days. We're so far away from "real" AI today, that it's not even funny. While there has been great progress in machine learning in the last 2-3 decades - recent results pushing results more to the spotlight -, what we have are certain specific tasks where we have good results for (pattern/object/image recognition, games, etc.) but we have no intelligence in any sense of the word. Every working architecture that we have today is targeted and extensively trained for a single, very specific task (e.g., playing go, recognizing scenes and objects, recognizing specific patterns in signals and mimicking them - robotic arms, Google's music composer, etc.), incapable of doing anything else. E.g., an architecture built and trained for classifying and recognizing certain images and objects can't do anything with audio signals, radar signals, a go playing "AI" can't play chess, etc. No generalization, no transfer of gained experience for application to other tasks, and no real high level understanding and reasoning about anything. And let's not even start about chatbots.
I could go on with this, but my point is, talking about AI being more than humans, taking over, etc. is still very much sci-fi territory.
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
That's ok the AI will feed you and your family. To the protein bank.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Well, I think he's right. And he's actually one of those people with enough experience to say this, since programming doesn't require pesky interaction with the real world like, say, automated cars do, humans obviously suck at programming big time, and Gates is one of those people who ... suck[s] big time at programming over multiple decades.
First, FTFY. Bill Gates' technical experience is primarily in writing really really crappy software that failed. Name a single thing he actually wrote or led that was remotely successful. MS Basic? MS bought GWU basic to replace it.
His experience in being a cunning and unethical asshole only interested in himself? Well, you got me there.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Give full control of software development to advanced AI and witness how the people saying that current software is bloated are proven right.
I'd lean more towards code being designed and written in such a way that the human brain would soon have no ability to understand even the simplest routines.