Group items tagged

According to the World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs report, some jobs will be wiped out, others will be in high demand, but all in all, around 5 million jobs will be lost. The real question is then, how many jobs will be made redundant in the 2020s? Many futurists including Google’s Chief Futurist believe this will necessitate a universal human stipend that could become globally ubiquitous as early as the 2030s.

AI will optimize many of our systems, but also create new jobs. We don’t know the rate at which it will do this. Research firm Gartner further confirms the hypothesis of AI creating more jobs than it replaces, by predicting that in 2020, AI will create 2.3 million new jobs while eliminating 1.8 million traditional jobs.

In an era where it’s being shown we can’t even regulate algorithms, how will we be able to regulate AI and robots that will progressively have a better capacity to self-learn, self-engineer, self-code and self-replicate? This first wave of robots are simply robots capable of performing repetitive tasks, but as human beings become less intelligent trapped in digital immersion, the rate at which robots learn how to learn will exponentially increase.How do humans stay relevant when Big Data enables AI to comb through contextual data as would a supercomputer? Data will no longer be the purvey of human beings, neither medical diagnosis and many other things. To say that AI “augments” human in this respect, is extremely naive and hopelessly optimistic. In many respects, AI completely replaces the need for human beings. This is what I term the automation economy.

uarterBack August 3, 2017 at 8:31 am Re NYT Hacking Wars story, I have long had the same “self-licking ice cream cone” concerns. The military industrial complex has been slowly shaping polic opinion to make “kenetic” response to cyber attacks palatable. Consider this 2013 article: https://armscontrolnow.org/2013/05/30/is-there-a-place-for-nuclear-deterrence-in-cyberspace/ Cyber as a Casus Belli has two inherent fatal flaws in its inability to accurately prove attribution and the extent of damage. The former makes it impossible to know if a counter attack is against a party that had any role in the original cyber attack, and the latter makes it impossible to prove or verify harm, which is the foundation of the “proportional response” required under the international laws of war. These two flaws can raise the potential of false flags to a new level. Do we really want to shed blood of untold numbers of military and civilian soles because of a report of a unattributable cyber attack on a purported “crital infrastructure component” that nobody every heard of,and that cannot be confirmed as existing in the first place? Gulf of Tonkin, eat your heart out. Look no further than our present history. We are slowly moving towards war with Russia based on the premise of a cyber attack that may, or may not, have actually happened, and no one has been allowed to inspect the physical servers related to the claimed attack. International laws of war should be clear that kenetic response to cyber attacks must be off the table. The only acceptable proportionate attacks should e economic or offensive cyber. Full stop.