I mean, assuming they are not sentient and the labor is not slavery, what would that life be like?
For example, a skilled artist might make a nice portrait, however in this world, anyone can have a machine construct the portrait with symmetry and accuracy only a machine can.
Would human skills be slowly outnumbered?
Would we become dependant on machinery to do everything for us, to the point where we sort of de-evolve?
It would be a very interesting future to be sure. Though I feel the humans would at some point desire to do something in the form of work. Work brings sense of purpose even if one is working a job that is not their favorite it still occupies the mind a way that is mostly positive when compared to not working.
I think the humans role in this future though is likely be more of a monitoring one. Like we will be more, or less baby sitting the robots, and repairing them. Though once they start to repair themselves then we are finished plain, and simple.
I think it'll lead to poorer mental health. It'll be hard for people to stay mentally healthy with all their free time and their basic needs fulfilled. Not impossible though. Hopefully we can find a substitute for work that'll help us as most work isn't ideal either.
At base, it’s stupid and lazy. Humans fuel the economy and the world itself, not robots. And that’s a world wide rule. That’s just the tip of the iceberg on the subject. More robots = less jobs = poverty = less of a population = eventual extinction. Robots are far from being programmed to do what humans can do on a day to day to make the world more livable. Ex: planting seeds for trees: trees filter/create oxygen, they cannot plant crops, they cannot slaughter animals or breed them, they cannot do a lot of things that they already do alone, they need humans to help. And humans made them, not the other way around. No way a robot replaces a human in any form.
Edit: Not to be rude but your base post is actually flawed in thought. And you know me, I’m not trying to be mean at all. But a robot cannot create art from the heart. It has none. We will never devolve. Humanity will have periods of evolution and periods of being stagnant and eventually we will cease to evolve and most likely become extinct but devolve? No.
At base, it’s stupid and lazy. Humans fuel the economy and the world itself, not robots. And that’s a world wide rule. That’s just the tip of the iceberg on the subject. More robots = less jobs = poverty = less of a population = eventual extinction. Robots are far from being programmed to do what humans can do on a day to day to make the world more livable. Ex: planting seeds for trees: trees filter/create oxygen, they cannot plant crops, they cannot slaughter animals or breed them, they cannot do a lot of things that they already do alone, they need humans to help. And humans made them, not the other way around. No way a robot replaces a human in any form.
Edit: Not to be rude but your base post is actually flawed in thought. And you know me, I’m not trying to be mean at all. But a robot cannot create art from the heart. It has none. We will never devolve. Humanity will have periods of evolution and periods of being stagnant and eventually we will cease to evolve and most likely become extinct but devolve? No.
I was thinking we de-evolve because there is no reason for us to progress as individuals, we don't need to learn advanced education or work hard because the job is being done for us.
We lose a role in society basically.
There is music composed by AI.
So technically it is possible for machines to learn how to accurately make art.
I don't really know how AI works but for example, a lot of video game content is created procedurally now. Meaning you don't need artists to do everything in a game from scratch, you can just run mathematical algorithms and it creates the content for you.
I know McDonald's replaced some personal with machinery so that people can choose their food through machines instead of talking to people.
I would imagine if a machine can be programmed to do a certain task, and with the new announcement of AI being integrated into a lot of businesses so that businesses can excel, it would be possible for machines to do jobs and find new and better solutions for these jobs, working without human control.
I bet machines can build a computer easier than I can build a computer.
At base, it’s stupid and lazy. Humans fuel the economy and the world itself, not robots. And that’s a world wide rule. That’s just the tip of the iceberg on the subject. More robots = less jobs = poverty = less of a population = eventual extinction. Robots are far from being programmed to do what humans can do on a day to day to make the world more livable. Ex: planting seeds for trees: trees filter/create oxygen, they cannot plant crops, they cannot slaughter animals or breed them, they cannot do a lot of things that they already do alone, they need humans to help. And humans made them, not the other way around. No way a robot replaces a human in any form.
Edit: Not to be rude but your base post is actually flawed in thought. And you know me, I’m not trying to be mean at all. But a robot cannot create art from the heart. It has none. We will never devolve. Humanity will have periods of evolution and periods of being stagnant and eventually we will cease to evolve and most likely become extinct but devolve? No.
It's not stupid at all, everything humans have achieved is to make their lives easier. Poverty despite production still up is an issue with the economic structure and should be changed. And automation has already replaced lots of peoples jobs.
It's not stupid at all, everything humans have achieved is to make their lives easier. Poverty despite production still up is an issue with the economic structure and should be changed. And automation has already replaced lots of peoples jobs.
I don’t believe I ever called it stupid, nor do I think that. I would never call Demon or what he says stupid.
I do not like when others blatantly twist my words. It looks bad on them...
But assuming you did not mean to do that... Of course poverty is up... “robots” being a factor in that as per statistics and literally what you just said.
And again... Autonomy replacing jobs = increased poverty which I have already stated so I am not sure what you are correcting that I have said. There was nothing to be corrected, honestly. I stated pure fact and logic.
I was thinking we de-evolve because there is no reason for us to progress as individuals, we don't need to learn advanced education or work hard because the job is being done for us.
We lose a role in society basically.
There is music composed by AI.
So technically it is possible for machines to learn how to accurately make art.
I don't really know how AI works but for example, a lot of video game content is created procedurally now. Meaning you don't need artists to do everything in a game from scratch, you can just run mathematical algorithms and it creates the content for you.
I know McDonald's replaced some personal with machinery so that people can choose their food through machines instead of talking to people.
I would imagine if a machine can be programmed to do a certain task, and with the new announcement of AI being integrated into a lot of businesses so that businesses can excel, it would be possible for machines to do jobs and find new and better solutions for these jobs, working without human control.
I bet machines can build a computer easier than I can build a computer.
Who runs that program to make music? A human lol. Who made and coded that program? A human. Who made the machine that makes all that possible for the program? You guessed it. A human.
Us losing our roles in our own society = we will be extinct. Nothing good could come of that whether at the hands of robots taking over in a sense that we won’t know what to do when they ultimately fail, because they don’t last forever. Or in a sense that the higher powers that be want the lower ends of the food chain, which is us, to not indulge in what they created and controlled, and have us die out so they can solely benefit, and not everyone benefit.
Again, we made it that way and they don’t run alone. We run them. I think you have an off concept of how independent robots are when they aren’t nearly as independent as you think.
Again, poverty rears its ugly head.
A machine mostly can build one faster but a robot that does that has more chances of error than a human which has been historically proven on multiple occasions as well as putting it as simple as something like a factory belt missing one tick and no one is there to fix it, and instead of it doing something symmetrical and the right way, it wasted millions of dollars in material repeating the process when an error is present that a human could have corrected but that particular “robot” had no way of knowing because it lacked the proper perception to notice such a thing.
I don’t believe I ever called it stupid, nor do I think that. I would never call Demon or what he says stupid.
I do not like when others blatantly twist my words. It looks bad on them...
But assuming you did not mean to do that... Of course poverty is up... “robots” being a factor in that as per statistics and literally what you just said.
And again... Autonomy replacing jobs = increased poverty which I have already stated so I am not sure what you are correcting that I have said. There was nothing to be corrected, honestly. I stated pure fact and logic.
Post automatically merged:
Who runs that program to make music? A human lol. Who made and coded that program? A human. Who made the machine that makes all that possible for the program? You guessed it. A human.
Us losing our roles in our own society = we will be extinct. Nothing good could come of that whether at the hands of robots taking over in a sense that we won’t know what to do when they ultimately fail, because they don’t last forever. Or in a sense that the higher powers that be want the lower ends of the food chain, which is us, to not indulge in what they created and controlled, and have us die out so they can solely benefit, and not everyone benefit.
Again, we made it that way and they don’t run alone. We run them. I think you have an off concept of how independent robots are when they aren’t nearly as independent as you think.
Again, poverty rears its ugly head.
A machine mostly can build one faster but a robot that does that has more chances of error than a human which has been historically proven on multiple occasions as well as putting it as simple as something like a factory belt missing one tick and no one is there to fix it, and instead of it doing something symmetrical and the right way, it wasted millions of dollars in material repeating the process when an error is present that a human could have corrected but that particular “robot” had no way of knowing because it lacked the proper perception to notice such a thing.
Right now we are the creators, yes, but I think in the future AI software could create software, or even hardware if they have been created by humans once they could probably evolve by themselves.
They become irrelevant. Next people start replacing their own body with robotic parts to compete. Or they are simply replaced and gone while robots rule.
( Yes I totally picked this idea from a manga, named Blame)
They become irrelevant. Next people start replacing their own body with robotic parts to compete. Or they are simply replaced and gone while robots rule.
( Yes I totally picked this idea from a manga, named Blame)
Maybe it's a somewhat future, we might head for, I mean the idea on paper seems awesome, imagine if you didn't need to work or you didn't need to hire people you could just let machinery do it for you.
To some extent that is happening, AI can correct our grammar, mcDonalds is testing a fully automated drive thru and AI built into companies for the sake of being state of the art is seen as a present goal.
I don’t believe I ever called it stupid, nor do I think that. I would never call Demon or what he says stupid.
I do not like when others blatantly twist my words. It looks bad on them...
But assuming you did not mean to do that... Of course poverty is up... “robots” being a factor in that as per statistics and literally what you just said.
And again... Autonomy replacing jobs = increased poverty which I have already stated so I am not sure what you are correcting that I have said. There was nothing to be corrected, honestly. I stated pure fact and logic.
You said it was stupid in your first three words, so I was addressing that... And my point was, while yes, robots make people poorer, that's not an issue inherent with automation, it's an issue with how our economy is structured. There is no reason why we should stick to the current economic models when automation plays a bigger role, because it means we can finally stop needing to work while still having things done.
You said it was stupid in your first three words, so I was addressing that... And my point was, while yes, robots make people poorer, that's not an issue inherent with automation, it's an issue with how our economy is structured. There is no reason why we should stick to the current economic models when automation plays a bigger role, because it means we can finally stop needing to work while still having things done.
It depends on the context of the world (and factors thereof) in which such a future occurs.
Assuming our own,it would be both stupid and lazy. Working is not just a means to an end, the process itself is useful for development. That, and the fact that we do not perceive everything - needs and benefits of processes - means that such retirement would likely prove extremely harmful.
The dangers associated with any concept are usually just a flipside to an opportunity/benefit associated with it. In this case, the dangers of overworking are the flip side of the need to do some work in the first place.
It depends on the context of the world (and factors thereof) in which such a future occurs.
Assuming our own,it would be both stupid and lazy. Working is not just a means to an end, the process itself is useful for development. That, and the fact that we do not perceive everything - needs and benefits of processes - means that such retirement would likely prove extremely harmful.
The dangers associated with any concept are usually just a flipside to an opportunity/benefit associated with it. In this case, the dangers of overworking are the flip side of the need to do some work in the first place.
Maybe people will reason that if robots takes care of everything people can do whatever they want instead and just not worry.
I saw an article about AI being used in courtrooms instead of judges.
Maybe people will reason that if robots takes care of everything people can do whatever they want instead and just not worry.
I saw an article about AI being used in courtrooms instead of judges.
Even accepting the premise of the robots not being controlled by people and being perfect at their tasks, what people want is not always what they need.
My lactose intolerance has many milk shakes to sell you . . .
Even accepting the premise of the robots not being controlled by people and being perfect at their tasks, what people want is not always what they need.
My lactose intolerance has many milk shakes to sell you . . .
