AI News, Like mechanization, AI will make us richer. But it may not help ... artificial intelligence


Joan Cornet, Director Digital Health Observatory and Coalition of the Willing at ECHAlliance, muses on how the growth of

is causing trouble for the cognitive and emotional system of the simple human.

From small transhumant tribes we have achieved an extraordinarily complex and effective civilization for thousands of years.

Although there are huge differences in wealth or access to basic services, most of the world’s population has a higher qualitylifestyle than 50 years ago.

many hot topics such as climate change, extreme poverty in parts of the globe,

inequality between men and women, wars and massive exiles, etc., but this

of the human species, individuals, people, are extraordinarily fragile and

Back in time It all started over a million years ago.

We’ll never know when exactly it appeared, we only know of the first tool that was discovered almost a century ago, named “The Oldowan”.

We don’t know how to use it either, but it was probably crucial to kill wild animals, and also to get rid of enemies.

These early tools were simple, usually made with one or a few flakes chipped off with another stone.

Oldowan tools were used during the Lower Palaeolithic period, 2.6 million years ago up until 1.7 million years ago, by ancient Hominin (early humans) across much of Africa, South Asia, the Middle East and Europe.

The term Oldowan is taken from the site of Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, where the first Oldowan lithics were discovered by the archaeologist Louis Leakey in the 1930s ( extract from Wikipedia) It’s a long period

of history from the Oldowan tool, 1,7 million years ago, to the Artificial Intelligence

we enter another dimension and surely the growth will be even more

and especially how our cognitive and emotional system can adapt to a new

of years — but ‘modern’ humans, the ones we’re used to today, have only

radical faction which destroyed textile machinery as a form of protest.

You don’t need to go back to the Middle Ages or later centuries to see how human beings are frightened of their own creations.

And not only that, but a technological novelty, either by the device itself or by the novel use of it, adds new fears to the list.

by—but typically operate quite differently from—the ways people use their

nervous systems and bodies to sense, learn, reason, and act.

AI research massively, as AI (strong or weak AI likewise) wants to mimic

research: large scale machine learning, deep learning, reinforcement learning,

robotics, computer vision, natural language processing, collaborative systems,

crowdsourcing and human computation, algorithmic game theory and computational social

healthcare, education, low-resource communities, public safety and security,

If the initial and target states are clearly defined, an algorithm can be used, a systematic methodology, which always leads to the right solution.

While we are probably far from creating machines that are self-aware, we should focus our efforts toward understanding memory, learning and the ability to base decisions on past experiences.

And it is crucial if we want to design or evolve machines that are more than exceptional at classifying what they see in front of them.

This is a new paradigm that will bring new phase of our human evolution.

Does tech threaten to rerun the worst of the Industrial Revolution?

Accusing someone of being a Luddite today implies that they are a thoughtless opponent of progress, resistant to technological change and guilty of obscurantist obstructionism.

The world was transformed by the mechanisation of agriculture and manufacturing, fuelling an astonishing surge in living standards in Britain and many other parts of the world.

It is hard to argue with the Communist writer Friedrich Engels, all too familiar with the dark, Satanic mills of 19th-century Britain, when he wrote that the machine-owning industrialists grew “rich on the misery of the mass of wage earners”.

The central concern that runs through The Technology Trap is that, unless we are very careful, our latest technological revolution may well turn out to be a tumultuous rerun of the Industrial Revolution, with dire social and political consequences.

An opinion poll by the Pew Research Centre survey in 2017 found that 85 per cent of US respondents favoured policies to restrict the rise of the robots.

Frey’s analysis is worth taking seriously because the Oxford economic historian and economist has researched his subject deeply and has co-authored one of the most widely cited studies on automation.

His 2013 paper, written with the technologist Michael Osborne, estimated that 47 per cent of US jobs were at high risk of automation because of the impact of artificial intelligence.

Those textile workers who smashed machines in cotton and woollen mills across middle England from 1811 to 1816 were, as Frey argues, perfectly rational economic actors.

The introduction of water frames, carding machines and spinning jennies eradicated many jobs, sucked cheaper child labour into the workforce and suppressed wages.

Unlike the French, British governments were prepared to deploy mass coercion to repress machine breaking because they were more worried by external, rather than internal, threats.

Many other countries were caught in what Frey calls a technology trap in which labour-replacing machines were vigorously resisted for fear of their disruptive force.

But electricity and the internal combustion engine, the two general purpose technologies of the 20th century, helped improve the material wellbeing for the majority of working people.

The mechanisation of the household liberated millions of women from time-consuming domestic chores, enabling them to enter the formal workforce and increase household incomes.

The introduction of running water, electricity, refrigerators and washing machines cut the workweek of the housewife by a staggering 42 hours between 1900 and 1966.

He highlights a correlation between those states with the highest robot density and those states that unexpectedly swung behind Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election, namely Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The perspective is very different when viewed from the rising economic powers of Asia, most notably China, where millions have been lifted out of poverty and robots have been mostly embraced as a means of increasing the productivity of an ageing population.

Sensitive to voter interests, western democracies may yet touch the brakes when it comes to mass deployment of AI technology, while authoritarian regimes hit the accelerator hard.

deeply alarming about the stability of western democracies given he predicts the further concentration of wealth in a few hands and in even fewer locations.

Robomorphisation & The Retrofit Human

Robomorphisation & The Retrofit Human. Presentation given at CogX 2019, on the Ethics Stage Beth Singler; Post-Doctoral Researcher, University of ...

Per Bylund on AI and the Structure of Production

Our guest is Dr. Per Bylund ( of Oklahoma State University, who joins Jeff Deist to dispel some of the myths surrounding artificial intelligence ...

Will Humans Be Obsolete After The New Industrial Revolution?

Subscribe to NowThis World: Russia became the third-largest military spender in the world in 2014, and has plans to ..

Humans, machines, and the future of work

Speaker: Moshe Vardi Moshe Vardi, Rice University explores the question "If machines are capable of doing almost any work humans can do, what will humans ...

The Ethics and Governance of AI opening event, February 3, 2018

Chapter 1: 0:04 - Joi Ito Chapter 2: 1:03:27 - Jonathan Zittrain Chapter 3: 2:32:59 - Panel 1: Joi Ito moderates a panel with Pratik Shah, Karthik Dinakar, and ...

Louis Hyman: "Temp: How American Work, American Business, And the American [...]" | Talks at Google

Louis Hyman, associate professor of economic history at Cornell University, discusses his new history: Temp: How American Work, American Business, And the ...

Will we all be replaced by Robots? - Michael Gibbs

In this talk by Prof. Michael Gibbs, Clinical Professor of Economics, University of Chicago Booth School of Business discussed fears of automation and artificial ...

Peter Joseph - Where are we now?

Peter Joseph's July 25th 2009 Zeitgeist Movement Lecture: London , UK Entitled "Where are we now?" Subtitles provided by ..

Fix Work Now, Or We All Die Tomorrow

There are many “future of work” panels, but none that have featured wealthy capitalist turned activist Nick Hanauer, author, entrepreneur and tech leader Tim ...