Will A.I. Put Lawyers Out of Business?

[62caddy]

Originally Posted by Formerly YB-2

Privatization of the prison system is a whole other 'ball of wax'. Ethical & moral issues involved.

I don't know if that's necessarily true. With proper oversight, there's really no reason it couldn't be done.

[Formerly YB-2]

Originally Posted by 62caddy

I don't know if that's necessarily true. With proper oversight, there's really no reason it couldn't be done.

Perhaps in the same Utopian world where AI & the machines won't take over. Unfortunately, we aren't there at the moment (or even close........ especially with the prison systems).

[PHC1]

For those interested in the topic, I suggest watching "Survivors Guide To Prison" on Netflix for an eye opening statistics and a whole new perspective on our criminal judicial system... https://youtu.be/dubGnRmUXck

[62caddy]

Originally Posted by Formerly YB-2

Perhaps in the same Utopian world where AI & the machines won't take over. Unfortunately, we aren't there at the moment (or even close........ especially with the prison systems).

Nor much of anything else - at least for the time being.

AI isn't going to take anything over unless permitted to do so. In any case, no AI system should ever be programmed so that it cannot be overridden. That should be Asimov's robotic rule #1.

[PHC1]

Excellent TED presentation which covers many of the concerns we covered in this thread.

Can we build AI without losing control over it? | Sam Harris

https://youtu.be/8nt3edWLgIg

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by 62caddy

The reason the traditional family farm is not profitable is because that particular business model is no longer competitive.



If a business model is no longer sustainable, answer is to do something else, not to march back in time nor to impose limitation on technological advancement.

In any case, none of this is even relevant to main point which is that a small fraction of the work force in needed to sustain the population today than had been needed 200 years ago. This frees up talent to be used for other endeavors.

Put another way, if farming or (insert x industry here) required employment devotion from 100% of the work force, there would be little time to produce anything else.

AI is no different than any other labor savings technology that had appeared in the past. If AI is as prolific as you say it is and technology continues to advance as it had in the past, the average standard of living will continue to increase in the future just as it had done since the beginning of the Industrial Age.




You listen to too many "experts".

You should watch this presentation. It addresses many of the things you have mentioned in this thread. https://youtu.be/swB7Ivct8d8

[PHC1]

Kai-Fu Lee is a Chinese venture capitalist, technology executive, writer, and an artificial intelligence expert. He is currently based in Beijing, China. Lee developed the world's first speaker-independent, continuous speech recognition system as his Ph.D. thesis at Carnegie Mellon.

What is Kai-Fu Lee's answer to AI taking jobs? Creating more "compassion" jobs.... Another great TED presentation. This guy knows AI...

https://youtu.be/ajGgd9Ld-Wc

[PHC1]

In the next 20 years, more will change about the way we work than the last 2000 years. The incredible inventions of intuitive AI | Maurice Conti

https://youtu.be/aR5N2Jl8k14

[62caddy]

Originally Posted by PHC1

You should watch this presentation. It addresses many of the things you have mentioned in this thread. https://youtu.be/swB7Ivct8d8

I watched with interest. Good speaker but in my view he makes one fatal error by not taking into account the downward pressure on the cost of living, indeed all costs due to increased efficiency. Over time, this would result a higher average standard of living a lower cost than what it is today.

This becomes obvious when, for example, an individual earning $20,000/year today is compared with a individual earning an inflation-adjusted $75/year in 1900. The standard of living for each of these two hypothetical individuals is not even close to being comparable.

As AI becomes more developed and its applications increase, ever proportionally less income will be needed to live and survive. Imagine some day way into the future how our successors will be looking at us paying $30,000 for a heart operation when they'll be paying $20 in future funds(!) - with a higher success rate to boot! Don't laugh, it may well happen along with future technologies that make today's AI look like a buggy whip.

I'm sorry, I just don't see these doomsday prophecies playing out any differently as the innumerable times they had been made in the past...as in being 100% wrong.

[PHC1]

Originally Posted by 62caddy

I watched with interest. Good speaker but in my view he makes one fatal error by not taking into account the downward pressure on the cost of living, indeed all costs due to increased efficiency. Over time, this would result a higher average standard of living a lower cost than what it is today.

This becomes obvious when, for example, an individual earning $20,000/year today is compared with a individual earning an inflation-adjusted $75/year in 1900. The standard of living for each of these two hypothetical individuals is not even close to being comparable.

As AI becomes more developed and its applications increase, ever proportionally less income will be needed to live and survive. Imagine some day way into the future how our successors will be looking at us paying $30,000 for a heart operation when they'll be paying $20 in future funds(!) - with a higher success rate to boot! Don't laugh, it may well happen along with future technologies that make today's AI look like a buggy whip.

I'm sorry, I just don't see these doomsday prophecies playing out any differently as the innumerable times they had been made in the past...as in being 100% wrong.

Well, it won't be a surgeon performing that $20 heart operation... That surgeon will be at home enjoying his free time and relying on government subsidy. Sounds fantastic.