Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
IQ requirements would rule out about 80% of the population.
|
No, not really true at all. I don't think its really that different from the corporate infrastructure of a Suncore or Husky. Lots of those jobs can be targetted to a the average person, any many of the trivial jobs can be targetted to lower IQ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
Yes, but there's reason to believe this time it's different. New technologies and new businesses are not labour-intensive. You only need so many software developers to keep them afloat. Kodak once employed 150,00 people. When Instragram was bought out, it employed less than 20. Google has a valuation bigger than IBM's ever was, and employs a tiny fraction of the number of people IBM employed at its peak. Even in professions like legal, accounting, and medicine, grunt-work is being automated. Five developers can create a product that puts thousands or tens of thousands of out of work.
So what do people transition to? Services? Are our grandchildren all going to be personal trainers and sommeliers? The question there is who's going to have the money for those services if 70 per cent of people are unnecessary to the economy? Maybe each mega-rich innovator and venture capitalist will employ hundreds of lackeys to serve his every need. Doesn't sound like an especially appealing future.
|
Also not really true. Software infrastructure inherently will have bugs, the bigger the system, the more software developers that are needed to fix those bugs. 95% of the software developers are probably doing that.
Also, more opportunities will be out there for all levels.
Also, more of the jobs will go towards more useful tasks. This is no different then then the concerns for the past century. Its like saying now that machines can help drill oil rather then using a shovel, where will the jobs go? Well there were still a large number of people working at oil refineries.
what will be true is you may need more skills if you would like to make a higher salary, as the bar for a office job is probably raised.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cube Inmate
In addition to the processing power that goes into individual cars' "brains," the other huge factor available to advance auto-pilot is the ubiquity of wireless communications for information sharing. What we'll see is that rather than relying on a static map (or GIS database) of road infrastructure, the "database" will be dynamically updated and maintained by every single vehicle that uses the road. Potholes...pedestrians leaving football games...ice-covered roads -- in 10 years or less, our cars will know far more about the current state of our roads than we do now. AND, our cars will know about problems on the road minutes before encountering them, rather than seconds before (relying on an attentive driver watching the road)..
|
this is how i see it
Quote:
Originally Posted by CroFlames
Artificial intelligence is a whole other ball game. The theory is that a computer can learn faster than a human can, and given enough time, the computers will be learning at such a rate that they will become smarter than humans. This is a real possibility. This video does a great job explaining it. And this guy is anything but a nutjob/conspiracy theorist.
|
also not really true at all, not really what AI is about. it may describe its application but I think this is a problem when you get a non-scientist trying to describe a science. you get some really weird interpretations and extrapolations.
(LOL at them using trig and quantum mechanic equations to describe how AI works, pretty much tells you how reputable the source is. they may as well have Schrodingers cat in there)