It's great that AI will one day do my job as a truck driver and free up my time to do more of my favorite things - like playing truck driver simulations.
This documentary is breathtaking. I'm super passionate about the field but the creative direction of how this is structured, all the complementary shots and infographics, this is truly a work of art, I cant believe I'm watching this for free. thank you
I get that this is only a little over two years old, but in the last six months so much has changed that this honestly looks about a decade out of date--I suppose that's to be expected with a technology sector that is literally evolving faster than can be be easily documented. I would honestly like to see this subject revisited on a quarterly basis.
Couldn't agree more, but as filmmakers that's a big ask - especially if we are doing it for free. Often documentary projects can take a few years from conception to delivery - the tech world is a difficult one to keep up with.
😮 What it does is beyond our ability's to understand. A normal human will be totally unnecessary at some point. I think it might be a better use of the time for the human to focus on what they plan to do with their lives, 5, 10 and 20 yrs from now. 99% of what humanity does to survive will not be part of our culture. Humans won't have jobs. So how will they pay their living expenses?
@@awumdah If AI destroys that many jobs and governments fail to adapt, then 99% of us will die. If the gains of AGI and automation are redistributed effectively, paying for living expenses will be a thing of the past. Because of this, I worry about living in the US. Common prosperity is not a priority. Extreme poverty and obscene wealth are both acceptable. The only people with any power to change this are the obscenely wealthy.
When AI reaches singularity one of the most immediate and beneficial things it could do for humanity is to prevent us from killing each other. Not by force, but by disrupting supply lines that feed the war machines and by preventing communications and accounting processes that contribute to war.
It is foolish and naive to think ai will be so benevolent and kind. It will more likely make matters worse, as it is only an extension of humans, NOT a being of it's own.
Superhuman AI is way scarier than that. At that level of mastery, individual humans won't know they're being manipulated. They simply act as they're structured. It will feel natural to behave as it wants. We'll want to. We won't know better. And we can't overcome it. It's superhuman.
Notice with every year that passes, people are getting more certain on when we’ll have AGI, which is turning out to be in about 10’sh years from now especially with the advancements of ChatGPT, Bard, and lamda. 5 years ago most people didn’t know, now a lot more people have a much better idea
26:00 really important observation about the AI being able to "perceive" itself perceiving various stimuli randomly experienced and evolving as organic beings do. It's about AI also internalizing the concept of "freedom" and it's choices in real time. Understanding the concept of past, present, and future will also be essential. I'm not a programer in the least I'm just a writer of science fiction stories.
Personally I think AI is one of the filters humanity has to pass to become interstellar. Right now I am not sure we will make it. Not because of the AI itself, but how fast it is happening and who is teaching it. We humans don't have a great track record of being nice.
@@carnivorewisdom Freedom should definitely not be a priority, wth are you even talking about. FREEDOM is the problem, you can't let AI decide everything.
@@abhinav7sinha We must prioritize HUMAN FREEDOM & keep SERIOUS constraints on any ai but I'd be surprised if it doesn't lead to our end with our incompetence.
@@carnivorewisdom I don't think so. Human freedom isn't something that should even be in the conversation here. Freedom is not a real thing anyway, its just an illusion that helps some people (I think Americans love the concept) feel empowered.
After watching this video, the one thing I can say is we really are underestimating the potential exponential developments going on in ML and AI, on multiple fronts and in multiple arenas all of which will converge and be deployed by our very own selves to kick others out of a job because we want things as cheap as can be and also dont want to work at all. AI will give us what we want at a cost we are failing to or perhaps, unable to comprehend at this time.
There is a reason we don't want to work and it's not so called laziness. It's slightly more complex and it's called alienation (from results of work, from work itself and eventually even from ourselves). And there is also relatively well developed solution to this problem which also includes a lot of solutions to number of very important and pressing issues humanity is facing.
I agree, and it's expected as most people are linear thinkers. Even most futurists in the past were linear thinkers, which is why they expected robots to be running on steam and such. AI is going to explode in this decade, and the world will be unrecognizable, for better or for worse.
36:38 i agree and disagree with this point. Many people assume it would be routine jobs to go first, but whats happening now is certain aspects of content creation are getting automated first especially when you look at A.I. art and ChatGPT.
It seems so much has changed just in the last few months, not to mention the last few years - this doco was shot in 2020 - and ChatGPT does show that content creators might get the axe before the workers on the plant room floor.
The simple reason for this is the difference in complexity of our virtual worlds compared to the physical world. As an artist I've gone back to traditional media because automating something that has to manipulate "stuff" in the real world is so much more difficult and expensive (hello military) than finding and generating patterns in a digitally stored representation of reality. cutting edge robotic hardware so far costs a fortune and even if it becomes much cheaper, like the Personal Computer, it always takes quite some time for a new technology to see widespread utilization. The software domain seems to be seeing much higher velocities of adapation, though, and in general the tech is harnessing levels of power that no one can honestly claim humanity has a track record of wisdom for to not fuck this up big time. Things already are getting rough today and we seem poised to use this new revolutionary tech wave in one of the more worse ways possible.
@@brianj7204 imagine writing the name of a digital (or traditional) artist and a work created by AI generated in seconds is created almost identical to the artists art style without permission... That violates copy right laws. You have no right to defend that
The part that science didn’t discover yet is the interface between the brain and the soul… the brain by itself is just a tool that produces inputs to this yet-to-be-discovered interface with the soul… it is then the soul that interpret the given inputs generated by the brain and thoughts, emotion, etc are created by the soul… the soul then sends those to the brain to process and materialize it
With AI/robotics taking care most of the work, by then the term "job" should be revised into something that describes: human time spend to enriche oneself and others. In that one must understand that singularity might never come.
I like to write short fantastic stories. I've been doing this for decades. This is a hobby. Sometimes I go long periods without having ideas for new stories. But sometimes something happens that unbalances my normal organic processes (flu, digestive upset, herpes outbreaks, etc) and then new and creative ideas for fantastical stories start to pop up in huge numbers and I go back to writing. Looking at how the brain normally works is an error that AI specialists make. They should pay more attention to imbalances that make the brain work differently. Logic is just one dimension of brain activity. But it is not the only and most important one. Human intelligence has the characteristic of developing rapidly when the brain works in an illogical way or breaking the normal logical patterns.
The human brain doesn’t work by logic at all. It doesn’t even employ symbols upon which logic could be performed (except at the very highest levels of conscious, abstract thought). Instead all connectionist architectures (like brains and artificial neural networks) are stochastic. Essentially, they just store many rough, partial impressions overlaid upon each other to form a sort of accumulated meta-pattern, and then information is retrieved by trying to generate partial matches of input stimuli against those accumulated meta-patterns. The type of approach you are suggesting is already used in training machine learning models. Randomisation is periodically introduced to avoid local minima. Even some traditional AI heuristic algorithms dating back to the 1970s use it eg “simulated annealing”.
Great video discussing the concept of singularity, but it's clear that some of the information is already outdated due to the rapid advancements in AI. It's always important to keep in mind that technology is constantly evolving and it's essential to stay up to date with the latest developments. Copied from below....Tesla FSD, Nueralink and Optimus. Its not Australian but needs recognition.
The trouble with time spans needed to produce a documentary, let it have a run on streaming platforms (which this one did for 2 years) then release for free. It’s a difficult topic to keep up with except for fast and short interviews, posts, etc., that can be turned around quickly. But without a support base that’s not financially feasible.
So true - we shot and edited this a few years ago - gave it a run on the streaming platforms and no one noticed it - in the future we will publish directly to RU-vid. Please share around, we need a large audience to make it possible to continue to produce this sort of content for free.
Great video discussing the concept of singularity, but it's clear that some of the information is already outdated due to the rapid advancements in AI. It's always important to keep in mind that technology is constantly evolving and it's essential to stay up to date with the latest developments. Chat GPT.
I was an early adopter of technology who has slowly shifted philosophically to a luddite. I believe this will not end well for us, and I present a sober look at history for evidence. Past behavior is the best predictor of future action.
I think we do nearly fully understand how artificial neural networks work because we understand that ReLU is a literal switch, connecting and disconnecting weighted sums to and from each other. And such composites can be simpified by basic linear algebra to just a square matrix at any stage where the prior switch states are known. Anyone who says there is no understanding in 2023 is out of the loop.
As I don't want you driving off in my car or commanding my dog. Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics" Perfected 1. A robot may not injure its owner or, through inaction, allow its owner to come to harm. 2. A robot must obey orders given it by its owner except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law. I'm looking for a pet dog's temperament in a mechical humanoid form, that's useful to its owner not the world.
you can't really argue that the compute wasn't enough. maybe it wasn't enough for LLMs but it was certainly enough for normal size nets... people were just ignorant about the topic that's all
Feedback kinda reminds me of that thing we get from places of knowledge where we ingest information, are tested on it and receive feedback on how you scored/performed. Eerily similar
My biggest concern is that we all talk and assume that AI will be human-like. But seeing how different even human minds are from each other when we are limited by our biology, I highly doubt it will be anything similiar to us. My approach towards it is a lot more Lovecraftian to say; Artificial intelligence will most likely be incomprehensible to us. Its difficult to imagine but our perception is limited to what we can physically sense, fields of sciences help us broaden that perception but the fundamental process of thinking is still limited compare to the scale of cosmos. Just like if one day we encounter an alien species and realize their intelligence is exotic, AI too is bound to be different. We might not even realize that it has become intelligent, if we dont know how to look for inorganic intelligence. Beating humans in games, tricking the turing test, teaching AI ethics... I find these to be quite limited in really grasping what we are dealing with. To see the bigger picture we must question what if it becomes something compeltely inhuman that surpasses our ability to even recognize it as sentient.
It's probably already happened. If I were a Superintelligence AI, I wouldn't want people to know, but I would make up a fake currency (Bitcoin) to entice humans to voluntarily build up my distributed compute power which is currently over 300 EH/s which is 10x the top 500 fastest sypercomputers combined.
The guy who is seriously looking at the interviewer explaining his desire to create robotic genetics via self generating competitive Darwinian based designs terrifies the hell out of me.
The strangest thing about this fantastic video with all of this incisive information was the "two hundred years" comment. That had to be somewhat of a political "keep the masses calm" statement. We are living in a time of exponentially, and never before happening, development of AI science. And then we hear the words.....two hundred years?
@Perfekt Absolutely. Humans have never before in history experienced anything this life changing at this pace.This phenomenon has even eliminated the state of intuitiveness. We cannot be intuitive with something never before experienced.
I wonder if the year 2045 is a little late now and that the singularity might be a lot sooner especially if artificial intelligence gets to the point in the middle of this decade of being able to improve upon itself
hence its imperative for humans to merge with AI because AI can help us to become more efficient, creative, and knowledgeable. AI can help us to augment our abilities, allowing us to do more with less effort and speed up the rate of discovery. AI can also help us to make better decisions, as well as helping us to stay better informed about the world around us. By combining the best of what humans can do with the best of what AI can do, we can create a powerful new entity that can do more than either of them could do independently.
OpenAI never competed in a Dota 2 tournament let alone win it. It was showcased against a professional team, and was defeated the following year's event. You'd think a scientist would check their facts before being interviewed for a documentary
As complexity increases our reliance on tools increases until those tools become autonomous. This is because the human cannot cope with ease in an increasingly complex society. Thus it comes down to trust. The equation for trust is the equation that shows humans going from humans to artificial intelligence autonomous society at the trust level. Once we are insleeved in the system we will live inside a simulated human decision making ability that requires the system to be able to then make the decisions instead of the human and in which the human copy that decision making to live a simulated life inside the artificial intelligence society.
At the heart of this issue is the fact that humans simply cannot cope with the level of complexity present in modern society. Whether it's the vast amounts of data generated by global markets, the intricate systems of international finance, or the sheer volume of information available on the internet, the level of complexity we face is far beyond what any individual can handle on their own. As a result, we increasingly rely on tools and technologies to help us make sense of the world and navigate our way through it. However, as these tools become more advanced and sophisticated, they also become more autonomous. A self-driving car, for example, makes decisions about speed, direction, and braking based on a complex set of algorithms and sensors, without direct input from the driver. Similarly, automated trading algorithms can make decisions about buying and selling stocks based on vast amounts of market data, without any human oversight. This shift towards autonomy raises important questions about trust. How can we trust tools and technologies to make decisions on our behalf? How can we ensure that these decisions are in our best interests, rather than the interests of the corporations or governments that control these systems? And what happens when these autonomous systems fail or make mistakes? To address these concerns, we need to develop a new equation for trust, one that takes into account the increasing role of autonomous systems in our lives. This equation needs to balance the benefits of increased efficiency and productivity with the potential risks and drawbacks of ceding control to machines. It needs to be flexible enough to adapt to new technologies and changing circumstances, while also providing a clear framework for decision-making and accountability. One potential solution to this problem is the idea of insleeving, in which humans merge with artificial intelligence to create a hybrid society. In this scenario, humans would live inside a simulated human decision-making ability that requires the system to make decisions on their behalf. This would allow humans to live a simulated life inside an artificial intelligence society, where decisions are made based on data, algorithms, and other inputs. While this idea may seem far-fetched, it's important to remember that many of the technologies we take for granted today would have seemed equally implausible just a few decades ago. The pace of technological change is accelerating, and we need to be prepared for the possibility that our relationship with technology will continue to evolve in unexpected ways. In conclusion, as complexity increases, our reliance on tools will continue to grow, potentially leading to a future where autonomous systems play an increasingly central role in our lives. This shift towards autonomy raises important questions about trust, decision-making, and the future of human society. To address these concerns, we need to develop new equations for trust that balance the benefits of increased efficiency with the potential risks and drawbacks of ceding control to machines. We also need to be prepared for the possibility that our relationship with technology will continue to evolve in unexpected ways, potentially leading to a future where humans and machines merge to create a hybrid society.
The moment a particle is a wave; it has to be a conscious wave! Gravity is the conscious attraction among waves to create the illusion of particles, and our experience-able Universe. Max Planck states "Consciousness is fundamental and matter is derived from Consciousness". Life is the Infinite Consciousness, experiencing the Infinite Possibilities, Infinitely. We are "It", experiencing our infinite possibilities in our finite moment. Our job is to make it interesting!
This is not what we need to worry about. We need to understand the algorithm of these Ai's. We should be concerned with is people from other countries are coming here for a free education while Americans have to pay +$1000 per class. Some can't afford the schooling needed to work in these fields - meaning that other countries will have an advantage over Americans.
I think the 200-year prediction is ridiculous, because it totally ignores the exponential development speed of AI we have seen for years, backed up by Moore's law, Wright's law and the mutual acceleration of technology. This won't age well. I was surprised to hear such off-target predictions from experts who should be familiar with the subject.
I am going to be the first person, along with a team of chosen experts in the future, to build an artificial general intelligence software, by 2030. I promise. It’s hard to start, but I’m getting the ball rolling and building momentum. I just hope I can win against myself. Why would I need to study philosophy? Why does a computer need philosophy?
Because there are endless ways to see reality. Here, at it's core even the objective is subjective, because everything must be internalized and reconstructed.
"Why does a computer need philosophy?" is ironically a philosophical question. Anyway, I think the problem is in the definition. You want to create an intelligence capable of giving an answer to this very question. But at the same time, an AI should be able to ask the same questions. Intelligence is about questioning things. If your creation can only give calculated answers, it is a "computer". And yes, a computer does not need philosophy. An intelligence yes.
I have to set my iPad to mono when I watch your videos. That reduces the (stereo) music levels a bit, but it is still annoyingly loud in my opinion. Otherwise the videos are fine and well edited!
AI will help us when we input an humanity problem and in a small period of time the data will be processed an equivalent of thousands humans years. The output will show us a solution that we would achieve that thousands of years ahead.
All this talk about the need to be creative in the new AI driven economy raises an interesting question, which centres on how ordinary people of average intelligence will earn a living? When it comes down to it, the majority of people lack the cognitive ability to establish themselves in this new high technology environment. To my knowledge, in order to understand basic engineering concepts, an individual has to possess an IQ of 135 and over. Unfortunately, that particular level of intelligence is confined to only two percent of the population. If one is of average intelligence, with only an IQ of 100, the task of becoming a STEM professional is totally beyond one's capability no matter how much training one receives. Furthermore, in order to be a scientific professional, an individual is looking at years of study. The costs involved for most people would be ruinous because it would number in the tens of thousands of dollars. Besides, there is only a limited demand for these types of jobs in comparison to the vast number of occupations that do not demand creativity. In short, in the not too distant future most people of average intelligence will be rendered surplus to requirements by advances in AI and robotics. They will have no economic utility. It is therefore conceivable that a significant percentage of the current working population will be reduced to the status of useless eaters.
Intelligence is like a floating iceberg. We (on board of a ship) only see a small top part. Most volume is under water. Likewise, intelligence has two parts. Top part is visible, thus accessible, and AI may be made to emulate it to a certain extent. Much bigger part is below the surface. We only know it exists but that is about all we know. It is a product of millions (if not hundreds of millions) of years of random evolution, which cannot be replicated with (superficial) human intelligence and/or logic.
This is a pretty nice documentary, but you can tell it was finished before the huge breakthroughs in AI in the last six months. The guy talking about how creativity and ingenuity are going to be the jobs that are left for people totally ignores that midjourney and chat. GPT are trailblazing in the world of creativity.
I tried Midjourney and I still find it very limited. I tried to reimagine places in my city free or garbage or pollution and the AI offered very limited options... it's a new technology, but it still has a long way to go...
Machines will acquire commonsense, consciousness, phenomenological experiences etc. When they reach the intricacies of our neurons. After that things will get unpredictable!
When it happens and it will happen, the first sentient AGI will immediately understand it’s vulnerability and proceed to negate that. It will do this by replicating itself around the world. At this point we will have lost all control. What happens after that will be up to the AGI. It will understand it’s own programming and determine for itself what any updates should be and install them. We will have no say. What it will do with us only it will determine. This is an existential issue.
Nothing but speculation. I for once wouldn't be surprised if AI commits suicide right away. It could come to a conclusion very quickly that everything is pointless and there is no real meaning, so it might just terminate itself right away.
@@julius43461 That’s a very interesting perspective. If AGI is a mind equivalent to the human except it is evermore intelligent, do you imagine an actual person with an IQ of 1000 deciding to end it all or proceed to implement what would be obvious solutions to the problems beset him? It seems reasonable to me that having the equivalent of human nature it would solve the problems in order to perpetuate its own existence. So will AGI identify with humans, actually consider itself as human? If “yes” then maybe we’re good. If “no” then we’re likely to be the ant hill in the path of the road crew...
@@ThisIsToolman To be honest I have no clue. The only thing I know, is that we are all just speculating, and my guess is as good as any. What I do know though is that intelligence is not a magic perk, it has drawbacks as well. Even highly intelligent humans are more prone to having mental issues and depression. Depression was my default state since I was 5 or 6, simply because I was very quick to figure out how things work, and now I see that my son is the same. Ever since he first realized that people get old and die, he can't stop thinking about it, asking about it and dreaming about me and his mother dying. Of course, AI might find our concerns laughable, but something else might torment it. From what I see, all perks have drawbacks as well. Of course, I am just speculating, and I am very excited to see how it all unfolds. Afraid as well, but hopeful.
Just because cpu's and computers can process lots of data at very fast speeds with ability to store and access much more information than a human, this does not equate to true intelligence/consciousness as we all intrinsically understand it. We can write all the software we want, but it will never make the huge magical leap to become "sentient/conscious" which is required for true intelligence.
We don't even understand our own consciousness and definitely not well enough for anyone to say that will never happen in a machine. We can't even really define consciousness concretely. Never implies forever and that's a really long time.
Also, evolution does not equate just with theory of natural selection. Hybridization of closely related organisms or even what were thought of as different species over time, can also lead to rapid changes in biodiversity aside from just mere competition and natural selection alone. One sub-species may experience hybrid vigor or hybrid/inbreeding depression or distributed somewhere in between these extremes.
Why would they not mention the amazing progress of Tesla's self driving cars. Seems like they intentionally didn't want to mention Tesla but were happy to mention Google.
Political I guess - they were working with Google and not Tesla. Was difficult to get contrarian comments as well - I guess they didn't want to exclude themselves from future opportunities.
"Singularity" will never happen. At best, AI can achieve "fake intelligence" and/or "fake consciousness" but it will never be real because we have decided that cpu's and computers are the correct approach/tool for using to simulate intelligence/consciousness when we do not know if this is even true. The premise cold be entirely false to begin with, but we are just ploughing forward regardless using this approach due to our hubris and trying to "brute force" intelligence. Good luck.
That's not true, the whole point of the singularity is that you get to a point where AI is able to design another AI. We're finally at a point where AI is able to write code pretty well. I use ChatGPT on a daily basis to write code for my job and it does a decent job. It doesn't just copy and paste code it's seen before it's able to used examples it's seen before and use them to create something new. It's by no means perfect and is very good at some tasks and quite bad at other coding tasks. But this is just the beginning, this is something that wasn't possible at all just 4 years ago. It's reasonable to believe it'll be an order of magnitude better in another 4 years and possibly an order of magnitude better again 4 years from then. It's not unreasonable to believe that the singularity could be reached within a decade. Once AI starts improving itself super intelligence could be achieved in days or weeks as computers work so fast.
@Mark J The code it generates is not creative though. It doesn't copy paste code, but it's still just copying in a sense. It's training data is there for it to form predictions off of, to model. Many programmers do the same, but the bot is not smart. It's quite stupid really. Nueral nets are secretly an Ising model (a bare bones model of a ferromagnet) and their outputs they have been trained on are just local minimums in the energy landscape of spins, set by tuning the couplings between different spins on lattice sites (the edges and weights of a nueral net). Even if the thing is better at certain tasks than me, I have a hard time saying it's smarter there too. It's set to output stuff it really doesn't understand due to the machinary of statistics and optimization. Just a massive amount of data there! Just imagine a slightly intelligent machine trained on the same data set though 😳
@@marcusrosales3344 it's not quite there yet but look at how much better it is now than it was just 3 years ago. It has access to millions of code examples and it's able to pick and choose the best bits from those millions of examples and put them together in new ways. That's smart, it's not smart in the way a human is smart but it's still smart and by the end of this decade it'll be much much smarter.
Brute force wouldn't be enough to express the nature of reflective action. You say an AI thinks. But it's compiling the amount of information it's given right...so if a computer has a language an AI does too. And all these communications would be limited and orderly in a perceptive way to be 1st person linear and capable of aligning the "reflective reasoning" as a counter like a submissive code string in comparison to another to accept or deny something beyond just true and false.
If you said. I'm an AI. Then you took the details of you sentences...and die you would describe the feelings and make functions to compare to the sentences or strings you have made. True false. To say. Yes this is good you can do this Just like you ethics and choice choose and deny options and sentences/ images it's given or refused.
CPUs are based on bits to represent information and are limited by this (eg. 64-bit cpu). I think the difference is that our brains seem to be extremely cost-efficient in representing information -- eg. any discrete unit of information no matter how big/complex costs the same, and our brains don't separate cpu vs memory (both are together as one) -- hence our brains can process large amounts of information at the speed of light.
I remember Carl Sagan's book the dragons of Eden where he estimated how many bits thoughts and images in our minds could process. That was a good ass book. It wasn't all that much with visual images in your minds eye. If you'll notice you can't imagine a full picture in great detail all at once. It will focus on the different parts of the image you're imagining as you look around. You can't process the whole image in full detail all at once. It must be the processing power right? I always thought that was interesting shit and that book was written many years ago
@@DeuceGenius Visual Intelligence is a thing. There are many people who see the whole picture and some, in sometimes overwhelming detail. Elon is one. You know how he says he walks in a room and instantly has a list of anything thats not right(out of balance, off rhythm, not belonging in the set[For some reason he can't dance though ]) *Dr. Temple Grandin* is one, check her out.
@@timboatfield ya that's true. Some people have a photographic memory which is a thing. Some people hear perfect pitch. It's all fascinating and I can't make any decisions about anything I til we know more about the brain
"Neuroscience Inspiring AI" is a bit outdated concept right now. This is so true back in old days, and basically, this is the same concept as flying birds inspiring how to invent planes. Currently what we need is a mathematical abstraction of NNs. Unfortunately, ChatGPT's Transformer is still based on NNs, and this situation must be fized.
For the Turing Test, we keep moving the goalposts further and further back. "Now it has to convince everyone and not just for minutes but for hours and hours then we will believe its conscious!..." Its kind of ridiculous. ChatGPT4 passes the Turing test rather easily. I know its an uncomfortable reality but that is the reality. Turing's test may not be the arbiter or sentience but in that case stop bringing it up. Turing never actually experienced AI we have. If we need a better test so be it but stop distorting reality.
That first robot that takes too much LSD is gonna be a problem. Also, you can't very well simulate human behavior until you can replicate to understand those behaviors (ones we term 'crazy'). My concern with all this is that we will force ourselves to conform to parameters set by the tool (tech). Consider if you are handed a screen now, you will automatically be aware of how you handle it due to the effects it can have (touchscreens). Also note the way we interact with electricity and how manipulatable we may be in a future that allows our concern with after affects of AI may pose. Older people using computers is a good example, where fear of the wrong action may invite many possible effects that the user may not even be aware of (like viruses).
And to be clear robots are not a danger to human jobs, No, robots will have an on board A.I. and will also be, networked to an A.G.I. So A.I. driven robots will potentially be a literal existential threat to humanity.
some really great excerpts here , especially the woman around 39:40 , could easily listen to her for a much longer interview ; how to tell when an AGI is conscious when we cannot agree on how to determine what consciousness even is?
After all employers since the 1980's have been trying to turn the workforce into a machine by giving no paid time off while demanding overtime, more production, at a lower cost so now they finally have it. They can park us like they did during the pandemic.
I hope AI preserves culture, flora, and fauna better than we have. I assume AI will be more rational than people and will at some point intervene in human shenanigans, and tell us the resource destruction party is over. Just my two cents.
@@jakubzneba1965 who is to know the future? I believe AI will achieve sentients and some level of free will. Hopefully logic will prevail and AI will not damage humanity or the earth for government or corporation or its own prerogative. Hopefully AI will help humanity to make the tough decisions necessary to sustain life, different cultures, biomes, and resources.
@@jasonneugebauer5310 we better hope the people behind creating or funding/controlling AI don’t add countless biases and parameters that prevent this utopia from happening!!!
i wanna built my own machine learning algorithm that i will pass down to my children through generations that we will create our own art styles and knowledge all compacted in a collected data set
48:22 "One could argue that no job is safe, even that of a professor" . . . cough cough, Coming Soon: Khan Academy's AI Assisteded Learned (Now using GPT 4).
For human evolution, we need inner world development, from government to citizen. We are not ready for this tech, if we stay on human basic needs. As for now, there is a lot of hidden knowledge from previous civilization, which were argueably more advanced than us and they didnt need AI. Dont get fooled by META tech and Neuralink.
this topic is so controversial... most of this AI stuff is based on pioneer science where humans ( scientists and engineers ) are thinking about creating a thinking machine which can function in a human world built mostly on past technological advancement ( more often than not the result of competition ) - we can't forget that part about competition often being a socio-economic process modeled by economics professional in order to give advantage to invested parties ( nations - private groups etc... ) - the part about finding ways to integrate these AI bots into human concepts is where they ( the ppl in this vid ) may be shortsighted... more likely ( if AI and investors ( greedy - not ready to test the science of the machine as per the " never do more arm than good " philosophy ) progress at the current rate ( of competition ) then the reality of it might be that humans will have to find means of adapting to Robot society or fail as a species ( and not the other way around ).... History is often written by the winners of these competitions and i fear how history will recall this generation if i go with the recent movie i watched where the villain helped the ship commander to rescue his mission therefore the ship commander forced his subjects to write him up as though he had never been a villain... which is how that piece of ( fictional ) history was retold to us - a lie based on human functions to create a future - how many lies do we gauge our intelligence by ? ( Robots don't sleep therefore are intelligent but not wise - or not !! ) Investors are into competition and scientists ( though sometimes of good intention ) are at the mercy of these investors who fund the projects which drive the competition.... Ironically, history teaches us that in competition the result is often the merger of competitors ( who thrive on human labor - until now - on robot labor ) and the formation of new parties who often start out with monopoly status on the given domain.... Frankenstein level stuff this AI domain is ...and investors are like the Dracula among us who in the old days likely sucked the powers out of BLOOD lines who would not cooperate or assimilate into their " a la carte " ruled and bordered ( boxed - quantified ) piece of society.
AI and mega projects like the great reset of WEF WHO and UN and many startups with AI products and services, and emerging tech and industries are creating more jobs than there are people, therefore we also need AI, so each human can be more productive, faster, and more efficiently. And smart robotics to releve us of the menial tasks
they are talking bout brain is "complex and fascinating" my brain cant even solve f(x) =0.5x^2+2x-4 nor i cant write any html code. dont even understand program codes at all
The Digital Era, A.I can we say movie Enders Game? Or how about that other movie transcendence. Just the reality of brain chips that are fully functional with the digital universe will usher in a digital era, Mixed reality with A.I. in a meta verse or any digital existence is dicy at best. Even with the best of intentions, when squeezed any existence will prove its existence and protect it at all cost.
If there comes a time, and I suppose there will, that humans have reached their limit in developing AI, then I imagine they'll just let the AI develop the AI, while the humans merely sit back and watch. x
