But that isn’t AI. That’s my point. Is it automation? Yes. Absolutely. But it isn’t thinking for itself, it is following instructions. It has no ability to deal with problems outside of the areas it is “trained” in. It can’t invent solutions to problems, only follow the instructions for solving a problem it has been given. It doesn’t “think” any more than any other program does.
I’m writing a visual novel game right now. In this game, the characters interact with the player, they respond to questions, have their own preferences and make their own decisions. But no one would think a video game character is actually thinking for themselves. They’re just lines of code made to emulate a conversation with a person.
And you should be very cautious about accepting any claims of “this amazing sci-fi tech will be here within the decade” because the newspapers have been making those claims for as long as we’ve had sci-fi. Someone else in this thread mentioned AI being hyped up for the past 60 years, and that entire time it’s been “just around the corner.” For 60 years. Don’t fall for marketing hype and buzzwords. Are robotics getting more advanced? Yes, they are. Automation is increasing as well. These are not the same thing as actual artificial intelligence though.
But it isn’t thinking for itself, it is following instructions.
And humans don’t follow instructions??
Our body and our enviroment are constantly prompting us to do things and we act on it. We need to eat so we will find a way to keep that need satisfied. We want to have fun and will try to find something fun. If it’s too hot or cold we will try to deal with it.
It doesn’t look diferent from a robot in a factory, for exemple, that always wants to do a job, finds a job by investigating its enviroment with photo recognition AI system or by being asked by someone or something to do a job, and then it finds its way to the job and tries to think of a solution to solve it based on how it has done other jobs before and if it doesn’t work it tries to come up with new solotions just like a human would.
If you are such a simple, uninteresting person that your existence has the same amount of richness and variety and spontaneity as a piece of industrial equipment, that’s just sad. I’d recommend finding some friends who aren’t online, who talk about topics other than robotics.
Robots don’t “want” anything, they don’t have any thoughts, they are just code operating a piece of equipment. They cannot deviate from that code, even if their designers put a bunch of buzzwords around them like “Machine Learning” to try and sell more units.
I’m not saying that AI can’t exist, just that people are building a shiny new type of forklift and you’re acting like they’re Data from Star Trek. We don’t look at what something could be, maybe, perhaps, as some indeterminate date in the future that is always a “decade away.” We look at what they are for and what they are designed to do. These do not have problem solving skills. You put a person in an environment with a problem they’ve never faced before and they will try to find a way around it. You put a robot forklift in the same scenario and it spills hundreds of boxes across the factory floor because the programmer didn’t think to code in a solution to that problem.
I’m not trying to be insulting, but it really sounds from your comments here that you don’t know how to program, that you don’t know anything about robotics beyond something you saw in a youtube video or Popular Science magazine. And you clearly know nothing about human psychology and neurology, if you’re comparing an automated assembly line to a person’s ability to function. I knows this sounds very disparaging and probably quite insulting, but you really haven’t made a case for anything here, except to insist that it “could be” something amazing, but every single grifter promises the same thing to their victims, I think you’ve been swindled, and possibly even bamboozled by techbros trying to sell a magical solution to all of humanity’s problems.
A common part of this particular techbro grift is to try and simplify human behaviour to try and make their claims about AI more reasonable sounding, they try to simplify humans to basic machine input > output, but humans aren’t like that. If we were, there’d be no society, no one creating anything except what is required to survive. A robot cannot paint a painting, it can only create a collage of paintings made by humans, and a factory robot cannot plan or organise, it can only follow instructions to do those things.
I’m not trying to be insulting, but it really sounds from your comments here that you don’t know how to program, that you don’t know anything about robotics beyond something you saw in a youtube video or Popular Science magazine.
I’ve used AIs (mostly LLMs) and follow discussions of what others are doing with and about extrapolations of what can be done with the newer LLMs/AIs by integrating then into systems.
If you are such a simple, uninteresting person that your existence has the same amount of richness and variety and spontaneity as a
piece of industrial equipment, that’s just sad.
A common part of this particular techbro grift is to try and simplify human behaviour to try and make their claims about AI more reasonable sounding, they try to simplify humans to basic machine input > output, but humans aren’t like that.
First of all, engineering and production are interesting things. Second of all, isn’t what you said basically saying that “the material reality is useless for humans as we are superior beings unconnected to the enviroment”?
We have hormones and other things that will push us to do certain things. We can also have plans and try to act on then, including how our plans relate to the enviroment and what our bodies want, potentially even trying to overcome what we want and can.
I think you’ve been swindled, and possibly even bamboozled by techbros trying to sell a magical solution to all of humanity’s problems.
Automation can be a great tool to save us from the need to work, but to get that we need to use automation by ourselves to get such a future. And since most discussion on the subject are by people who aren’t communists I wanted to start a conversation here to see if there are people that are keeping up with the monthly, and even weekly advances coming out in the AI, robotics and related fields to see what people think…
The reason this conversation isn’t being had by communists is because it is techbro hype. I understand why you wouldn’t want to listen to me telling you that, but please listen to the other people trying to tell you that. There’s a reason you’re getting downvoted, it’s because people disagree with you and you’re not listening to them.
I’m not arguing for a “soul” or anything like that here, if anything, I’d say you’re the one arguing for impossible things to manifest through thought of will alone, you’re the one making idealist claims here, that if we just support it hard enough, AI will become the big tiddy robot girlfriend you’ve always dreamed of.
No one wants to admit they’ve fallen for a grift, I get it, it’s not a grift, I just “don’t see the potential” but I do, I really do. I see a future where the capitalist class has largely replaced the working class with automation, causing massive issues for the vast majority of people, I see the automation only being about 60% as effective as people, but twice as cheap to maintain. You’re trying to discuss things from under Elon Musk’s boot here and it’s very off-putting to see something like that here.
The reason this conversation isn’t being had by communists is because it is techbro hype. I understand why you wouldn’t want to listen to me telling you that, but please listen to the other people trying to tell you that. There’s a reason you’re getting downvoted, it’s because people disagree with you and you’re not listening to them.
The majority of people support capitalism but that doesn’t make them right, does it?
Anyway, AIs are already being used by people to make their jobs easier and even taking some jobs, or is this fake? Also I haven’t seen
I’d say you’re the one arguing for impossible things to manifest through thought of will alone, you’re the one making idealist claims here, that if we just support it hard enough, AI will become the big tiddy robot girlfriend you’ve always dreamed of.
I’m talking about continued development of AIs by the people, specially by open source, and people being able to use them in their lives and automating everything possible as it has already begun to happen.
You’re trying to discuss things from under Elon Musk’s boot here and it’s very off-putting to see something like that here.
When you say something like this that has nothing to do with the discussion it makes me wonder about how informed your comments really are. Have you used any AIs?
You dodged my question when I asked earlier if you had any programming experience, instead saying that you’ve “used AIs” as if using a product makes you an expert on the development of it. You’re accusing me of being uniformed but you’ve said nothing of value here, just that AIs “could” be amazing one day. This is pure 100% techbro hype. I’m not saying these products are useless or a waste of time, I’m saying you’re falling for bullshit marketing about them being “AIs.” You’re marveling at a fancy word assembly program acting like it could show real intelligence and drive. It cannot, and it never will because they aren’t designed that way. The term “AI” is just marketing hype. Please listen to that at least. These are not AIs. This is automation via algorithm. These aren’t “Artificial Intelligence” no matter what the marketing around them says. Real people are losing their jobs because people fall for the hype and assume these products can do things they cannot actually do. I don’t understand why you keep insisting that “open source” programs existing somehow will mean that it will all work out alright. I guess that’s why Linux is used in every office PC, not Windows. Under a socialist state, a program that can take away tedious labour from the workers would be a good thing, but under a capitalist system it will do nothing but make things worse. This is why I’m implying you’re under Elon Musk’s boot. Because it sounds like you’re acting like the capitalists will randomly decide to act in the interest of the people because this technology is just “so incredible.” It sounds like you’re living in a fantasy land where magical AIs will solve everyone’s problems and not actually cause a massive unemployment crisis due to marketing hype. I don’t know how old you are, but I’m old enough to remember the .com bubble of the late 90s/early 2000s. I remember how many businesses went “all in” on the new fancy tech because they were sold on a bunch of fancy marketing buzzwords and were told that this was “the future” I also remember a lot of companies going bankrupt as a result and their employees facing homeless and poverty because of that. This has the stink of every single big tech fad before it, and like every single tech fad before it, people think it isn’t a scam because it has fancy computer words attached to it.
You dodged my question when I asked earlier if you had any programming experience, instead saying that you’ve “used AIs” as if using a product makes you an expert on the development of it.
I guess I did. I know basic programmin which I use to calculate repetitive stuff for me, like basic simulations.
You’re marveling at a fancy word assembly program acting like it could show real intelligence and drive. It cannot, and it never will because they aren’t designed that way.
Which is why I’m talking about “AI systems”. Because a “word assembly program” as part or a large system should be enough to automate most jobs (by number of workers) if they can be made good enough, even if it takes years to adapt it for every enviroment.
Also there is quite a lot that can be done with “word predictors”. For exemple, an LLM system could look into all the data from a company and make graphs and spreadsheets by itself while also looking at comsuption/“the market”/internet talks and trends to see what it should produce and in which quantity while perhaps even keeping contact with the clients’ personal Als to be sure it doesn’t under or over produces. There could be programs and people being used to check for mistakes and hallucinations but it could be making the jobs of many while only requiring a few to check things over.
Another exaple is that we don’t have robots in larger numbers nowadays in big part because the ones that exist can only do repetitive work, but what about a robot that has an Al that can look at images to see what is where and “word predictors” trained on what it should do and with the data of moving a robot (it can predict the numbers it needs to input to move the robot as desired) that can then move the robot to interect with it’s enviroment. At least repetitive manual labor should be automatable with this which should hopefully increase unemployment a lot.
I don’t understand why you keep insisting that “open source" programs existing somehow will mean that it will all work out alright.
If I thought it would turn alright I would have just sat back and waited for immortality to be developed instead of discussing it online ;)
Under a socialist state, a program that can take away tedious labour from the workers would be a good thing, but under a capitalist system it will do nothing but make things worse.
Precisely, but there should be a transition period that might be the last chance we have to do somthing, and from my point of view this is the most important part.
Because it sounds like you’re acting like the capitalists will randomly decide to act in the interest of the people because this technology is just “so incredible.”
If that was the case I would let things go by themselves so I can bask in the fruits of Al’s labor instead of gauging the organization of workers for the changes that will come, no matter how big or small.
It sounds like you’re living in a fantasy land where magical Als will solve everyone’s problems and not actually cause a massive unemployment crisis due to marketing hype.
I think they will cause unemployment because they will be good enough to take peoples jobs. But as long as it can cause unemployment or directly increase worker organization it is a big thing to pay attention to.
This has the stink of every single big tech fad before it, and like every single tech fad before it, people think it isn’t a scam because it has fancy computer words attached to it.
I might be optimistic about the comming changes but what is already here will have an impact, and hopefully it is for the better in the long term.
I think I might’ve been misunderstand your argument this whole time. It seemed like you were in the “blindly pro-AI” camp that I hear all the time on other social media. I don’t know if we even fundamentally disagree overall and might’ve just been arguing past each other.
I don’t think the tech is anywhere near where you think it is, as people have been making claims of automated factories and robotic workers for 2 decades now and while we are “closer” than we were, that tech has always been about “a decade away” the entire time.
The key factor here is making robotic workers that can do the job in a more cost-efficient way than real workers, and that isn’t there yet. It’s too expensive and fails too often. I don’t think the systems will need to be perfect to replace workers, just “good enough.” Like how a lot of fast food restaurants use automated kiosks these days instead of having an extra person working on the till. Those things are unsanitary nightmares and break down and fail constantly, and people often struggle to use them, despite their design being as simple as possible. But despite not being “good” for either the restaurant or the customers, they are cheaper than having extra staff working.
That’s how this tech will emerge, not as a glorious automated revolution of labour, but as a messy robot forklift that knocks boxes over half the time, but has a much cheaper running cost than the workers. It will be bad for both workers and consumers, but will technically make a profit over the alternative. That’s why this is something we should oppose, not because the tech “isn’t there yet” but because the capitalists have no incentive to wait until it gets advanced enough. It just needs to be profitable enough, and every time that has happened in history, it’s always turned out worse for society.
But that isn’t AI. That’s my point. Is it automation? Yes. Absolutely. But it isn’t thinking for itself, it is following instructions. It has no ability to deal with problems outside of the areas it is “trained” in. It can’t invent solutions to problems, only follow the instructions for solving a problem it has been given. It doesn’t “think” any more than any other program does.
I’m writing a visual novel game right now. In this game, the characters interact with the player, they respond to questions, have their own preferences and make their own decisions. But no one would think a video game character is actually thinking for themselves. They’re just lines of code made to emulate a conversation with a person.
And you should be very cautious about accepting any claims of “this amazing sci-fi tech will be here within the decade” because the newspapers have been making those claims for as long as we’ve had sci-fi. Someone else in this thread mentioned AI being hyped up for the past 60 years, and that entire time it’s been “just around the corner.” For 60 years. Don’t fall for marketing hype and buzzwords. Are robotics getting more advanced? Yes, they are. Automation is increasing as well. These are not the same thing as actual artificial intelligence though.
And humans don’t follow instructions??
Our body and our enviroment are constantly prompting us to do things and we act on it. We need to eat so we will find a way to keep that need satisfied. We want to have fun and will try to find something fun. If it’s too hot or cold we will try to deal with it.
It doesn’t look diferent from a robot in a factory, for exemple, that always wants to do a job, finds a job by investigating its enviroment with photo recognition AI system or by being asked by someone or something to do a job, and then it finds its way to the job and tries to think of a solution to solve it based on how it has done other jobs before and if it doesn’t work it tries to come up with new solotions just like a human would.
If you are such a simple, uninteresting person that your existence has the same amount of richness and variety and spontaneity as a piece of industrial equipment, that’s just sad. I’d recommend finding some friends who aren’t online, who talk about topics other than robotics.
Robots don’t “want” anything, they don’t have any thoughts, they are just code operating a piece of equipment. They cannot deviate from that code, even if their designers put a bunch of buzzwords around them like “Machine Learning” to try and sell more units.
I’m not saying that AI can’t exist, just that people are building a shiny new type of forklift and you’re acting like they’re Data from Star Trek. We don’t look at what something could be, maybe, perhaps, as some indeterminate date in the future that is always a “decade away.” We look at what they are for and what they are designed to do. These do not have problem solving skills. You put a person in an environment with a problem they’ve never faced before and they will try to find a way around it. You put a robot forklift in the same scenario and it spills hundreds of boxes across the factory floor because the programmer didn’t think to code in a solution to that problem.
I’m not trying to be insulting, but it really sounds from your comments here that you don’t know how to program, that you don’t know anything about robotics beyond something you saw in a youtube video or Popular Science magazine. And you clearly know nothing about human psychology and neurology, if you’re comparing an automated assembly line to a person’s ability to function. I knows this sounds very disparaging and probably quite insulting, but you really haven’t made a case for anything here, except to insist that it “could be” something amazing, but every single grifter promises the same thing to their victims, I think you’ve been swindled, and possibly even bamboozled by techbros trying to sell a magical solution to all of humanity’s problems.
A common part of this particular techbro grift is to try and simplify human behaviour to try and make their claims about AI more reasonable sounding, they try to simplify humans to basic machine input > output, but humans aren’t like that. If we were, there’d be no society, no one creating anything except what is required to survive. A robot cannot paint a painting, it can only create a collage of paintings made by humans, and a factory robot cannot plan or organise, it can only follow instructions to do those things.
I’ve used AIs (mostly LLMs) and follow discussions of what others are doing with and about extrapolations of what can be done with the newer LLMs/AIs by integrating then into systems.
First of all, engineering and production are interesting things. Second of all, isn’t what you said basically saying that “the material reality is useless for humans as we are superior beings unconnected to the enviroment”?
We have hormones and other things that will push us to do certain things. We can also have plans and try to act on then, including how our plans relate to the enviroment and what our bodies want, potentially even trying to overcome what we want and can.
Automation can be a great tool to save us from the need to work, but to get that we need to use automation by ourselves to get such a future. And since most discussion on the subject are by people who aren’t communists I wanted to start a conversation here to see if there are people that are keeping up with the monthly, and even weekly advances coming out in the AI, robotics and related fields to see what people think…
The reason this conversation isn’t being had by communists is because it is techbro hype. I understand why you wouldn’t want to listen to me telling you that, but please listen to the other people trying to tell you that. There’s a reason you’re getting downvoted, it’s because people disagree with you and you’re not listening to them.
I’m not arguing for a “soul” or anything like that here, if anything, I’d say you’re the one arguing for impossible things to manifest through thought of will alone, you’re the one making idealist claims here, that if we just support it hard enough, AI will become the big tiddy robot girlfriend you’ve always dreamed of.
No one wants to admit they’ve fallen for a grift, I get it, it’s not a grift, I just “don’t see the potential” but I do, I really do. I see a future where the capitalist class has largely replaced the working class with automation, causing massive issues for the vast majority of people, I see the automation only being about 60% as effective as people, but twice as cheap to maintain. You’re trying to discuss things from under Elon Musk’s boot here and it’s very off-putting to see something like that here.
The majority of people support capitalism but that doesn’t make them right, does it?
Anyway, AIs are already being used by people to make their jobs easier and even taking some jobs, or is this fake? Also I haven’t seen
I’m talking about continued development of AIs by the people, specially by open source, and people being able to use them in their lives and automating everything possible as it has already begun to happen.
When you say something like this that has nothing to do with the discussion it makes me wonder about how informed your comments really are. Have you used any AIs?
You dodged my question when I asked earlier if you had any programming experience, instead saying that you’ve “used AIs” as if using a product makes you an expert on the development of it. You’re accusing me of being uniformed but you’ve said nothing of value here, just that AIs “could” be amazing one day. This is pure 100% techbro hype. I’m not saying these products are useless or a waste of time, I’m saying you’re falling for bullshit marketing about them being “AIs.” You’re marveling at a fancy word assembly program acting like it could show real intelligence and drive. It cannot, and it never will because they aren’t designed that way. The term “AI” is just marketing hype. Please listen to that at least. These are not AIs. This is automation via algorithm. These aren’t “Artificial Intelligence” no matter what the marketing around them says. Real people are losing their jobs because people fall for the hype and assume these products can do things they cannot actually do. I don’t understand why you keep insisting that “open source” programs existing somehow will mean that it will all work out alright. I guess that’s why Linux is used in every office PC, not Windows. Under a socialist state, a program that can take away tedious labour from the workers would be a good thing, but under a capitalist system it will do nothing but make things worse. This is why I’m implying you’re under Elon Musk’s boot. Because it sounds like you’re acting like the capitalists will randomly decide to act in the interest of the people because this technology is just “so incredible.” It sounds like you’re living in a fantasy land where magical AIs will solve everyone’s problems and not actually cause a massive unemployment crisis due to marketing hype. I don’t know how old you are, but I’m old enough to remember the .com bubble of the late 90s/early 2000s. I remember how many businesses went “all in” on the new fancy tech because they were sold on a bunch of fancy marketing buzzwords and were told that this was “the future” I also remember a lot of companies going bankrupt as a result and their employees facing homeless and poverty because of that. This has the stink of every single big tech fad before it, and like every single tech fad before it, people think it isn’t a scam because it has fancy computer words attached to it.
I guess I did. I know basic programmin which I use to calculate repetitive stuff for me, like basic simulations.
Which is why I’m talking about “AI systems”. Because a “word assembly program” as part or a large system should be enough to automate most jobs (by number of workers) if they can be made good enough, even if it takes years to adapt it for every enviroment.
Also there is quite a lot that can be done with “word predictors”. For exemple, an LLM system could look into all the data from a company and make graphs and spreadsheets by itself while also looking at comsuption/“the market”/internet talks and trends to see what it should produce and in which quantity while perhaps even keeping contact with the clients’ personal Als to be sure it doesn’t under or over produces. There could be programs and people being used to check for mistakes and hallucinations but it could be making the jobs of many while only requiring a few to check things over.
Another exaple is that we don’t have robots in larger numbers nowadays in big part because the ones that exist can only do repetitive work, but what about a robot that has an Al that can look at images to see what is where and “word predictors” trained on what it should do and with the data of moving a robot (it can predict the numbers it needs to input to move the robot as desired) that can then move the robot to interect with it’s enviroment. At least repetitive manual labor should be automatable with this which should hopefully increase unemployment a lot.
If I thought it would turn alright I would have just sat back and waited for immortality to be developed instead of discussing it online ;)
Precisely, but there should be a transition period that might be the last chance we have to do somthing, and from my point of view this is the most important part.
If that was the case I would let things go by themselves so I can bask in the fruits of Al’s labor instead of gauging the organization of workers for the changes that will come, no matter how big or small.
I think they will cause unemployment because they will be good enough to take peoples jobs. But as long as it can cause unemployment or directly increase worker organization it is a big thing to pay attention to.
I might be optimistic about the comming changes but what is already here will have an impact, and hopefully it is for the better in the long term.
I think I might’ve been misunderstand your argument this whole time. It seemed like you were in the “blindly pro-AI” camp that I hear all the time on other social media. I don’t know if we even fundamentally disagree overall and might’ve just been arguing past each other.
I don’t think the tech is anywhere near where you think it is, as people have been making claims of automated factories and robotic workers for 2 decades now and while we are “closer” than we were, that tech has always been about “a decade away” the entire time.
The key factor here is making robotic workers that can do the job in a more cost-efficient way than real workers, and that isn’t there yet. It’s too expensive and fails too often. I don’t think the systems will need to be perfect to replace workers, just “good enough.” Like how a lot of fast food restaurants use automated kiosks these days instead of having an extra person working on the till. Those things are unsanitary nightmares and break down and fail constantly, and people often struggle to use them, despite their design being as simple as possible. But despite not being “good” for either the restaurant or the customers, they are cheaper than having extra staff working.
That’s how this tech will emerge, not as a glorious automated revolution of labour, but as a messy robot forklift that knocks boxes over half the time, but has a much cheaper running cost than the workers. It will be bad for both workers and consumers, but will technically make a profit over the alternative. That’s why this is something we should oppose, not because the tech “isn’t there yet” but because the capitalists have no incentive to wait until it gets advanced enough. It just needs to be profitable enough, and every time that has happened in history, it’s always turned out worse for society.