Jack Ma (of Alibaba) says "Say "No" to Manufacturing...
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 65
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, New Hampshire
    Posts
    3,919
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    798
    Likes (Received)
    2557

    Default Jack Ma (of Alibaba) says "Say "No" to Manufacturing...

    Jack Ma: We need to stop training our kids for manufacturing jobs - Sep. 2, 217

    This is curious. In some ways I agree with him, as we can see the advent of true AI allowing almost all of the manufacturing arts to be computer/robotized.

    On the other hand, I know a damn few people for whom manufacturing is their "art", and they would not have rewarding lives without the ability to "make something". It also plays into creative design, as knowing how to get from an idea to an existing product is frequently how someone will start when designing something new (that might actually work).

    So in my mind, this could happen, but it would be a tragic mistake for humanity. And I will note that Jack Ma, a Chinese national, does not address the huge role manufacturing plays in Defense. It would be convenient for most of the world to give up on having factories and metal mills, allowing China (most likely) to become the machine shop to the World.

    In that case, who do we buy from when under threat? How does one tie-in the current expansionist nature of China with Mr. Ma's concept?

    Paging SeaMoss...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Peoria, IL
    Posts
    10,467
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    32
    Likes (Received)
    7769

    Default

    Man I just don't know. I've been told that AI is just around the corner since the Terminator back in 1984 (I wasn't even alive). 34ish years later and it's still "just around the corner".

    I'm thinking that this whole AI thing is turning out to be a crap load harder than anyone ever realized. We're at a point where automation can do a lot of tasks in really high volume production. Setting up automation for even medium production volumes is still very far from economical.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,096
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    630
    Likes (Received)
    335

    Default

    Who teaches the system?
    Microsoft's Tay became an anti-semetic, government hating conspiracy theorist in the first day of introduction.

    Twitter taught Microsoft’s AI chatbot to be a racist asshole in less than a day - The Verge

    img_0230.jpg

  4. Likes digger doug, Adwcali liked this post
  5. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    8,421
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4481
    Likes (Received)
    3775

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ewlsey View Post
    Man I just don't know. I've been told that AI is just around the corner since the Terminator back in 1984 (I wasn't even alive). 34ish years later and it's still "just around the corner".

    I'm thinking that this whole AI thing is turning out to be a crap load harder than anyone ever realized. We're at a point where automation can do a lot of tasks in really high volume production. Setting up automation for even medium production volumes is still very far from economical.
    So far ... as to "AI", we are just NOT getting all that much "Artificial Intelligence", anyway.

    We seem to be getting more Artificial (pick which one has impacted you most recently):

    Idiocy,

    Irrelevance,

    Ignorance,

    Indifference,

    Incompetence,

    Impudence,

    Intrusiveness.... etc.

    A long-departed friend always referred to 'puters as "High speed idiots".

    Can't much fault him, so far.

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Northern Il
    Posts
    899
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    557
    Likes (Received)
    883

    Default

    I see and hear a lot about how AI is progressing but I think that there is a very serious underestimation of what is required for true intelligence.

    Roger Penrose, a rather prominent British mathematician brings the issue up often in his writings, usually at least a chapter or more in each of his books.

    It is one thing to use human intelligence to create rule sets that the AI engine will follow and build upon but it is quite another thing to be able to have an AI engine create its own rule sets from nothing.

    I think the crux of the problem lies in the philosophical question if man has a soul or not. If man does have a soul, then true AI would probably not be attainable but if man does not have a soul than we are then only mere biochemical processing units and AI would be eventually doable though difficult. Probably achievable only about 10 years after we solve the controlled fusion problem.

  7. Likes motion guru, Modelman, Mcgyver, mkd, toolsteel and 1 others liked this post
  8. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    8,421
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4481
    Likes (Received)
    3775

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ziggy2 View Post
    I see and hear a lot about how AI is progressing but I think that there is a very serious underestimation of what is required for true intelligence.

    Roger Penrose, a rather prominent British mathematician brings the issue up often in his writings, usually at least a chapter or more in each of his books.

    It is one thing to use human intelligence to create rule sets that the AI engine will follow and build upon but it is quite another thing to be able to have an AI engine create its own rule sets from nothing.
    Ah, nooo. That has become the problem, actually. As we even approach "AI" the "self optimization" parts want to do things their OWN way.

    Y'know little kids, and the "terrible two's"?

    Similar situations are arising with advanced AI systems.

    They had to shut a system down recently because it invented its own language.

    To a 'puter? "Humanity" as has been said arredy, is no more than a skin-disease on a ball of dirt. It isn't about whether WE "have a soul". Rather, whether a machine-system will ever have even "mercy", let alone a priority for (other) human lives over its own that it cannot find a way to circumvent.

    And why would we expect it to have THAT?

    We do not.

  9. Likes Milland, digger doug liked this post
  10. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Country
    CHINA
    Posts
    1,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    734

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milland View Post
    Paging SeaMoss...
    Just a speech, I think. Important People are always making Important Speeches. And Jack got there by graft and corruption anyway so what does he know ?

    Quote Originally Posted by ewlsey View Post
    Man I just don't know. I've been told that AI is just around the corner since the Terminator back in 1984 (I wasn't even alive). 34ish years later and it's still "just around the corner".
    Exactly. How many robot companies were there in the mid-seventies ? Fifteen or twenty ? Now how many ? Two or three ? It was The Wave of the Future.

    Turns out people are way cheaper and more versatile.

  11. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    7,231
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    308
    Likes (Received)
    3891

    Default

    I'm not so dismissive of AI and automation as most, above. Also not so sure that service jobs are so easily going to pick up the slack.

    DaVinci made hundreds of sketches of flying machines . . . and in subsequent centuries so many tried and failed it became a joke, easily dismissed. Point being that predictions of technology failing are correct, right up until they're not.

    Pick a profession -- and many are already able to be automated. Could be the future holds service jobs for emptying bed pans (maybe hard for a robot to do) but jobs ranging from truck driver and sales clerk to medical doctor (at least the diagnosis part) are on the edge of being automated.

    We're making lots of old folks and others in need of services. But what's somewhat unique is that today's aging baby boomers are relatively affluent - they got cheap but good educations, found jobs, bought homes, even had pensions. Not so clear our kids will even be able to afford someone to clean their homes, mow their lawns, empty their bedpans.

  12. Likes Milland, digger doug, Adwcali liked this post
  13. #9
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    17,227
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3365
    Likes (Received)
    5315

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Milland View Post
    Jack Ma: We need to stop training our kids for manufacturing jobs - Sep. 2, 217

    This is curious. In some ways I agree with him, as we can see the advent of true AI allowing almost all of the manufacturing arts to be computer/robotized.

    On the other hand, I know a damn few people for whom manufacturing is their "art", and they would not have rewarding lives without the ability to "make something". It also plays into creative design, as knowing how to get from an idea to an existing product is frequently how someone will start when designing something new (that might actually work).

    So in my mind, this could happen, but it would be a tragic mistake for humanity. And I will note that Jack Ma, a Chinese national, does not address the huge role manufacturing plays in Defense. It would be convenient for most of the world to give up on having factories and metal mills, allowing China (most likely) to become the machine shop to the World.

    In that case, who do we buy from when under threat? How does one tie-in the current expansionist nature of China with Mr. Ma's concept?

    Paging SeaMoss...
    Since man discovered fire and the wheel (and before then too) whatever needs to be done gets done to make life easier. I don't really find anything disturbing in the article. The Industrial Revolution was a giant step forward and what humans come up with just keeps on accelerating. A kid today probably can't imagine life without a computer or smart phone.

    I bought a robot lawnmower in spring and wish that had been invented years ago LOL When I was an apprentice and years after that CNC didn't exist. Until the day comes robots can think for themselves, hopefully to our benefit, then man will continue to have to do manual labour until a method is found to replace it.

    Won't happen in any of our lifetimes. We have though already started.

    An innovation leader — Study in Denmark

    I'm a firm believer in Darwinism. Evolve or perish.

  14. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Illinois
    Posts
    187
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    39
    Likes (Received)
    84

    Default

    I wonder when we can start replacing politicians with AI?

  15. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Near Seattle
    Posts
    4,253
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2201
    Likes (Received)
    997

    Default

    here's the more substantive issue - focusing 100% of your attention on the career paths of your parents, neighbors, or heros, might not be a great plan. because the world changes...

    a little like black activists pointing out the the NFL and NBA would provide careers to a very few black citizens, while being ordinary doctors, lawyers, engineers, plumbers, and so forth would provide vastly more careers, at what turn out to be higher lifetime net earnings.

    in the US today, there's huge emphasis on teaching people to program - I think that's a great idea (duh - i made a career of it) - but there's no way we're all going to do that full time. so "everybody should be a programmer" or "everybody should go into manufacturing" make no more sense than "everybody should go to college" or "everybody should join the navy".

    note that i pay no attention at all to Jack Ma...

  16. Likes HuFlungDung liked this post
  17. #12
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    17,227
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3365
    Likes (Received)
    5315

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shawnrs View Post
    I wonder when we can start replacing politicians with AI?
    I thought we had. It's the "I" in AI that'll take a lot more testing and work.

  18. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    peterborough, ontario
    Posts
    104
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    77
    Likes (Received)
    75

    Default

    My concern with AI is that any software, program is only as good as the dumbest/ laziest builder/programmer. How many mistakes, disasters can a user afford while the supplier works the bugs out. My computer operating system often gets updates hourly the same with any program/system I use; and while anything that's been done using the inherent problem can be undone, this may not be true in an ongoing AI system. If you have 50hp churning away a glitch is the last thing you need, or a car doing 90, or a plane lined up on a taxi way instead of a runway.

  19. Likes jlrii liked this post
  20. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Illinois
    Posts
    187
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    39
    Likes (Received)
    84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by art.h View Post
    My concern with AI is that any software, program is only as good as the dumbest/ laziest builder/programmer. How many mistakes, disasters can a user afford while the supplier works the bugs out. My computer operating system often gets updates hourly the same with any program/system I use; and while anything that's been done using the inherent problem can be undone, this may not be true in an ongoing AI system. If you have 50hp churning away a glitch is the last thing you need, or a car doing 90, or a plane lined up on a taxi way instead of a runway.
    a depressed/ hungover/ going through a divorce/ tired employee is not much better

  21. Likes camscan liked this post
  22. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Illinois
    Posts
    187
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    39
    Likes (Received)
    84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke View Post
    I thought we had. It's the "I" in AI that'll take a lot more testing and work.
    The "I" part will be a challenge but maybe we can add a heart to the units.

  23. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    409
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    239

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Monarchist View Post
    They had to shut a system down recently because it invented its own language.
    Interesting, can you direct me to a source with more information?

  24. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Arizona
    Posts
    4,381
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    17521
    Likes (Received)
    4085

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Toolroomguy View Post
    Interesting, can you direct me to a source with more information?


    Facebook AI Creates Its Own Language In Creepy Preview Of Our Potential Future

    Forbes Welcome

  25. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    RSA
    Posts
    934
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    219
    Likes (Received)
    148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ziggy2 View Post
    I see and hear a lot about how AI is progressing but I think that there is a very serious underestimation of what is required for true intelligence.

    Roger Penrose, a rather prominent British mathematician brings the issue up often in his writings, usually at least a chapter or more in each of his books.

    It is one thing to use human intelligence to create rule sets that the AI engine will follow and build upon but it is quite another thing to be able to have an AI engine create its own rule sets from nothing.

    I think the crux of the problem lies in the philosophical question if man has a soul or not. If man does have a soul, then true AI would probably not be attainable but if man does not have a soul than we are then only mere biochemical processing units and AI would be eventually doable though difficult. Probably achievable only about 10 years after we solve the controlled fusion problem.
    Feral children.

  26. #19
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    17,227
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3365
    Likes (Received)
    5315

    Default

    1.A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
    2.A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
    3.A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

    Three Laws of Robotics - Wikipedia

  27. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    3,074
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1317
    Likes (Received)
    1556

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke View Post
    1.A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
    2.A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
    3.A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

    Three Laws of Robotics - Wikipedia
    Yeah, but when the depressed, tired, and hung over programmer forgets to type in the first two, we're f*cked.

    Dennis


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •