From the “Walsh 2017
Survey,” the probability of when HLMI (High-Level-Machine-Intelligence) will
become relevant is discussed. This survey begins with questioning AI experts,
robotics, experts, and outside non-expert; from those who are most familiar
with the technology, it is speculated that by 2035 there is a 10 percent HLMI
will become relevant, by 2061, there is a 50 percent speculation, and finally
by 2109 there will be a 90 percent chance. I am not surprised to see the
absence of a 100 percent speculation, for something as complex as AI is very
difficult to predict the efficiency in the far future. The basis for this
relevance comes to that of ‘when a computer might be able to carry out most
human professions at least as well as a typical human.’ These predictions do
not seem too far-fetched because of how abundant the use of automized
technologies are today.
The survey also prompted
the sample groups to predict the likelihood of specific occupations, taking input
from both experts and non-experts. The occupations presented were speculated as
such: an economist is expected to have a 12 percent chance of being automized judged
by experts, and 39 percent according to non-experts. Electrical engineering
positions said by experts have a 6 percent chance of becoming automized, and 33
percent brought up by non-experts. A job in technical writing is predicted to
have a 31 percent chance of being automized according to experts, and 54
percent from non-expects. The last occupation questioned was regarding civil
engineering, experts stating 6 percent likely, and 30 percent announced by
non-experts. I found it interesting how the “non-experts” raise more concern
for AI taking several different fields of occupations from humans due to automation.
I believe this comes from a fear of being underqualified to potentially work
alongside these AI technologies, while the “experts” know that the majority of
engineering based jobs will be safe, for they will be the primary group to
build, maintain, and inform about the technology.
I personally am very
excited for the development of AI. Something as powerful as AI has no limit
because of how new it still is to us, so it can very much be the new big thing
for our generations, similar to the magnitude of the internet.
Madeleine Walker-Elders
I personally do a see a future in AI, but I agree with
your statement of "I don't think that the robotic revolution is the
imminent threat humans should be worried about." You mention "household
AI" items often, but i don't think this is where the fear comes from, the
real fear comes from the autonomous technologies that will have the potential
to make humans irrelevant in the workforce. I agree that household AI is making
its presence more and more clear in our lives, but I believe that is a good
thing because it trains us to be more accepting of new emerging technologies
Andre Morris
I really enjoy this topic, I have never really put
much thought into the concept of a "smart city," but I definitely see
the dangers that may come with regards to privacy. I believe certain laws would
need to be put into place for something of this magnitude; laws that ensure
full privacy and no intrusions into a persons home. Utilizing a "smart
city" could increase daily life efficiency and aid in crime prevention, so
if executed ethically and under the correct management this is an idea I would
support.
Abigail Kryszan
I am always interested in articles following AI. The
article you summarized regarding AI learning Quantum Mechanics made me think of
the good AI can since there are numerous articles describing the potential harm
that AI can bring. Creating an AI that can predict the quantum states of
molecules is a huge accomplishment not only in the AI field, but also in the
tech field as a whole. This use of AI shows the vastness and flexibility possible
within its capabilities, so I believe that AI can be the reason behind many modern-day
discoveries and the advancement of technology. Once AI can learn how to design,
new technologies will emerge quicker and more efficiently than any human could
ever produce.
No comments:
Post a Comment