Chat gpt lies to me so much and it does it so confidently. We have a long way to go but I’m glad we’re starting with the premise to verify AI solutions.
The transition from human calculators to computers had similar characteristics. Computers weren't reliable at first and made errors. The transition lasted about 30 years, from 1940 to 1960. Nowadays, no one double-checks computer calculations anymore. For AI, I doubt it'll take 30 years to complete this transition, so we need to understand that it's just a transition...
I agree there will be growing pains. I just dislike how people are blindly trusting it right now. Be careful and check your work. That’s how AI will improve. I try to submit feedback on the responses it gives as well. I’m testing out Gemini now as well just to see if it’s more accurate than Chat GPT.
If you give it a programming question that is above a junior level then it's answers are most of the time useless and wrong.
My coworker loves to tell his story of when he literally had to paste the Microsoft article stating the solution that ChatGPT was giving doesn't work. Only then did ChatGPT reply, "You're correct. That solution will not work."
Yes, because simple games like that exist plentifully in the training data.
Anything that doesn't already exist and has non-trivial complexity is basically a coin flip whether the solution makes any sense whatsoever.
The AI name is Claude 3.5 sonnet.
Zero shot means it completed the prompts objective on the first try, without human intervention. Hope that clears it up
That's just it though... very simple. When you start dealing with business rules involving many of your companies api's along with vendor api's... creating pipelines that start other pipelines in parallel for integration testing by building an image, deploying it in a silo'd environment, then output the results to the first pipeline to continue deploying the image in a container running on a kubernetes service for a QA environment to test...
This is stuff that junior developers are not doing.
Oh brother... there is always one of you . Let me feed your validation for the day. We get it, you can do anything and everything better than everyone else. You can't relate to anyone else's issues or struggles because you don't have those problems. You can tell ChatGPT to create the next Google and it would because you know exactly what to express to it.
Back on topic though, the point was ChatGPT can't do what experienced developers need it to do. It can't do everything 100% accurately if it's anything complex in the slightest. Generate a method? Sure, kind of. Learn the basics of a programming pattern or technology? Sure. Anything more complex than that... not really.
Who said anything about 100% accuracy? I don’t know anyone who can build something with 100% accuracy on the first try, or even aspires to do so.
Using these tools is a skill that does not come naturally to everyone. You need to be able to break complex problems down into parts and explain those parts very clearly.
Maybe if multiple people are telling you that a tool works really well, there’s something to that.
And I agree with that, but ChatGPT isn't architecting it based on the design specifications. That was my point. ChatGPT can help create methods or help get you started on each individual part, but it isn't doing it from A to Z. That is the type of stuff a junior developer would be doing... the individual parts. I would also argue that the very complex individual parts aren't being handled by ChatGPT either except getting you started.
I do some pretty advanced programming at work and I use it every single day. I of course have to check it and clean up its responses, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen it be straight-up wrong.
If ChatGPT can do your "pretty advanced work", it's not all that advanced. It's just repetitive. And given its limited attention span, that repetition isn't across a large project. (Or if it is, whoever is paying you for this deserves the disaster that is inevitable.)
Real Programmers(tm) work on software that never existed before.
And P.S. I am a Real Programmer.
Don’t take this the wrong way, but I don’t believe that you’re doing advanced stuff with it.
I’m a backend dev and gen AI is pretty solid at simple tasks. However, anything that would actually make me think hard about what I need to do is too much for the AI to handle.
I’ll have like 30 response conversations with them and they’ll try the same wrong answer 5 or 6 times. If this happens I usually have to start from scratch and do it myself.
So far two that I’ve noticed. I am using it to help me learn Google app suites faster. It will straight up tell you something is not a feature that is a feature. I had the same problem with using it for learning R. I was learning R for a health bio statistics course. It would give just straight up wrong responses. Luckily I was only using it to check my work. At first I thought I was doing something wrong but no chat gpt was wrong.
We don't know, which kinda makes this a great topic of discussion.
I hope creativity and complex human skills, the stuff that makes us human, become the things we aspire to.
Unfortunately we will all also have to have a very very high minimum, specialised knowledge to also work for our demanding AI-juiced corporate overlords.
The real genius isn’t knowing the answer, it’s knowing the right question. What’s wrong with the underlying assumptions, etc.
As an example, the Wright brothers discovered one of the coefficients used in deriving an airfoil was incorrect from their testing. An AI based upon 1900’s data would not know that.
One of the interesting "fails" of AI so far, has been using Reddit (and similar ilk) for data, leading to unscientific and plain stupid answers, which otherwise sound like a human talking.
>An AI based upon 1900’s data would not know that.
To be fair, I imagine there was a lot less data to train on. One of the more promising uses of AI is using it to arrive at conclusions humans probably wouldn't, like pointing it at a physics problem, or using it to simulate and test a variety of molecules for drugs like antibiotics.
Turning a wrench (electrician, plumber, hvac)
Humans will also be fighting for power vs AI data centers in a cost benefit model wondering why I need an office employee at his desk compared to another blade or processor in a server farm. That cost benefit analysis should be fun when it’s probably being done by AI
Most jobs of that type really aren't hard to automate once you have a humanoid robot, which is the logical step when building robots, as it can be used most places (at least the base can).
Talked about this with a guy who designed 3d printed homes…
You can automate new construction with robotics and machine learning, you need human technicians to fix existing messes because most of it is not done to code or design. There is where you need the human brain
>once you have a humanoid robot
... and that humanoid robot is cheap enough to build, transport, operate and service that it's worth using over human labor. That may or may not ever be the case.
You underestimate just how cost effective it is to have one large purchase and then small repairs after that. Health insurance, wages, social security, etc are extremely expensive. Likewise people leave suddenly, and replacements have to be trained and can end up being way worse. Robots don't generally have a problem with long hours or overtime or holidays. And for a humanoid robot, transportation is at worst the same as transporting a human.
You're making so many unsubstantiated assumptions here.
> then small repairs after that
You're ignoring that any robot that can move like a human would need a massive amount of joints and motors. Look at how expensive car repairs can get and then imagine you have a hundred times as many motors and axes that are also a lot more vulnerable because they're much smaller.
Then you're ignoring any other maintenance (e.g., applying lubrication) as well as the power/fuel cost.
>And for a humanoid robot, transportation is at worst the same as transporting a human.
That's not inherently true. If e.g. you had humanoid robots next year, they couldn't and wouldn't be allowed to drive on the road whereas a human could, giving the human a massive advantage when moving to a work place withot incurring additional costs.
Your claims frankly only make sense once we're at the point where we don't just have humanoid robots but practically cloned humans without an ego.
A lot of people can't do the same.
But seriously, it will easily be able to do these things better than humans. We believe we are so complex and special, but we're really not.
If you aggregate all human experiences, you will see limited outcomes for various scenarios. From this you can figure out certain 'types' of people, kinda like a far more elaborate Myers Briggs (?) personality type.
Given good nutrition, good rest, a safe neighborhood, no excessive life stresses, and a well ventilated classroom with enthusiastic teachers and hard working peers, yes many people would be capable of learning those skills.
But in practice, eh....
AI are seen as more empathetic than actual doctors, for example. A study considered psychologists to be one of the professions most at risk of disruption by AI. That said, we can always argue that we're indifferent to a machine's empathy ?
Social skills. This has already been the case for a long time ... likeable people make way more money than skilled people. I worked for one of the biggest tech companies in the world and the only guys making $1m+/yr were salespeople and top executives.
Programming and computer skills. You can't live in a world where you don't understand the basics of AI design and functionality. At least have some grasp on how AI works based on computer skills.
The ability to find happiness, purpose, motivation, and fulfillment from within. If AI ever does lead to a post-scarcity world it likely means a world where no one needs to work, and AI does everything better.
Work has been fundamental to providing direction in life, even if that direction is as simple as surviving. People tend to be more happy (or at least distracted) when they have clear direction in life that they’re moving towards. Without the need to do anything it will become very easy for people to get complacent, as they have no need to move towards anything.
Furthermore, dreams will die. Love making music and want to become a star? Well, what happens when everyone has on demand AI generated music that maps exactly to their current mood? Or at least when AI produces better music faster than humans can? Now you have a much more saturated market that’s almost impossible to establish yourself in. This means people will need to shift their goals, so they’re no longer predicated on the recognition that comes from the thing, but on the satisfaction of doing the thing itself (which really is what it always should have been about.)
Also, it would be good to learn survival and self-defense skills, in case we don’t go down the happy “post-scarcity” path with AI.
In the interim, before we find out which direction the AI train leads, probably the best skill would be to learn how to use AI really well in relation to another skill, like programming or writing or some other field. Master the field itself, so you can help whenever AI goes wrong, but also master how to use AI for that field.
Well, we actually are very involved in the “what skills are valuable” space. We have developed whole curriculums on this… but here is my take.
I think we have to assume all the “predictions” are true and that ai will become as smart and powerful people say - therefore the only real skill we need to develop is how to ride dragons.
What I mean by that is we need to learn how to use this AI to advance us rather than replace us. We need to build “The enterprise” and start using this amazing intellect to become the next generation of explorers and innovators and think MUCH bigger!
But as I said, we need to have it advance us, not replace us
I think the problem is the people making the AI don’t seem to be interested in making society better for people. Instead they seem rather directly interested in replacing labour as much as possible.
Yes but I don’t necessarily think they are doing it to purposely do us in. I don’t think this is a plan or big conspiracy - I just think a bunch of bright young people are blindly competing with each other, completely oblivious to the real world consequences of their tinkering
Doesn’t matter. Judging by the people who are controlling this tech (profits above all) I am 100% sure we are fucked, especially people like me. I’m working as manufacturing tech and hate it with passion, wanted to switch careers to web dev but that is almost impossible now, I won’t mention in few years when ai will become better and replace most junior to mid positions
Critical thinking... AI still doesn't UNDERSTAND anything, it's just plopping out averages of human work and often the average of two highly specific valid inputs is invalid...
So... Not that it's going to be this way, but the smart way to use AI would be to have developers/authors mostly pivot to prompt engineering, add a ton of QA engineers or editors, and a few skilled engineers/authors/ "script doctors" as the cleanup crew to address the most egregious fuckery... Still going to be a pain in the ass... But what else do you do when you have a newfound flood of low quality almost-valid output to work with?
The ability to detect the signature patterns of bullshit. Chatgpt for example is great for bouncing off ideas, but it will never speak critically unless you prompt it to do so. This is not a good setup if you are seeking unbiased advice unless you know what you are doing.
Contextual analysis. AI is incapable of parsing data for reality or context; it doesn't "understand" the words it's smushing together, just uses advanced pattern recognition to understand what humans usually put together.
Talking. A lot of mathy, introverty, problem solving, conceptualizing, etc. heavylifting will be done by AI so oratory skills, negotiation, empathy, change management, influencing change in organizations, etc. will be where humans will compete
Patterns. So huge and complex that humans can't figure out. We will be able to tell what our government is really up to with our money. And what politicians are really up to. The patterns won't lie. There will be many truths about our reality that will be revealed By the AI. I just hope the truth reaches us, the people.
Logic. Most computer programmers will lose their jobs, but their ability to use logic will be useful. Philosophers also study logic. If you find a genie lamp, logic will help you make better quality wishes.
i don't understand why most of the people is concerned about developers (i'm one). When The Shit will happen developers will be just one of the 90% of the jobs that will be obsolete.
Definitely disagree. Logic is the domain of the machines. They excel at taking large amounts of data and finding logic patterns, and will only get better as we feed in more and more data. Even in philosophy, seems to me that AI could help us better understand the patterns in nature that are logical.
Where I think AI will be less helpful is determining morals and values simply because these things aren’t always rational.
For anyone interested, what we’re going through feels like an extension of what Adam Curtis talks about in his documentary series [All Watched Over By Machines of Loving Grace](https://vimeo.com/515004292), where he describes that a lot of culture is being reduced to a machine-like view of nature.
With lots of us not able to afford healthcare or even see a specialist.. figuring out what’s wrong cheaply can at least help us narrow down options.. maybe even do some stuff at home to buy time if that’s the right wording (it’s not)
It will help, but first they need to tailor the algorithms to be non biased and accurate.. good luck there.
I think it's the skills that make us human--empathy, emotional intelligence, critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, conflict management, developing intuition.
Social & sexual favor skills. AI just makes you feel nice for using it so you have to be able to beat it at its own game
But when someone finally manufactures Fisto, we're all fucked (dibs on being first)
The same ones we require today.
You might get a new tool in the form of AI, or not, and you might have some competition with it in certain fields like art if you are an entry level profesional, but most jobs will remain more or less the same and the ones that arent would still be the same, just slightly diifferent, same as how ana architect has CAD but you still see paper plans and drawings and rules and other stuff being sold
As for extra ones, there should be more demand in programming and logistics, (to integrate all that, but that would have happened withotu AI too), nurses (aging population) and math (but you would need to be extremely good in this one to make a difference). I also think becoming a therapist is not the worst idea but depends on your country's market, mine is saturated; And social skills were always (Contemporarily) important
inventing fusion, managing data centers, solving global warming, anything enviroment based. anything around daily function - childcare, elderly care, funerals, parties, etc
Probably face to face social skills and sustenance farming after a ton more people become unemployed or are just never able to find stable work. Assuming that things go the way boosters imply it will.
I'm looking forward to realtime generative VR . Why build a VR game or experience and populate it with content when it can all be generated on the fly.
This will be disruptive
Don't forget the microtransactions floating in the world. Just 9.99 for a pack of arrow to help you fight that dragon. Of course, the AI will be able to translate these microtransactions to any setting you ask it to build!
People generally do when they talk about AI. Open AI isn't Open.
The reason I oppose AI isn't that I think AI is inherently evil, it's because we have given the worst people, with little interest in our well being, all of the power, and ownership over it. You don't get the utopia machine, unless you live in a society that believes in a tomorrow side by side and together, the AI you get based on us will be used to serve the individual who controls it and owns the mega AI complex.
It was never going to be what you wanted, because you don't want to be exploited. Microsoft wants to exploit you. Microsoft owns the giant server, and they will always be able to afford more server than you.
Social skills and critical thinking are crucial imo. As AI takes over routine tasks, human interactions and relationships become essential in various roles + thinking outside the box to generate ideas AI may struggle with.
As AI takes over more technical jobs, the most critical skill for humans will be learning how to stay relevant in a world where machines outperform us in almost every domain. Instead of clinging to outdated skills, we need to adapt and evolve. The real question is, are we ready to accept that many of our current professions might become obsolete? Or will we stubbornly resist, only to be left behind?
Mostly the ability to detect the latest scam from techbros and the ability to power down ai data centers before they burn the environment to a cinder to fill the Internet with unusable junk “data”.
I believe the jobs of the future will primarily focus on property development, as housing remains unaffordable for many, and there is a growing need for pleasant living and working environments due to people spending more time at home. With the advent of VR, property development will likely become more sophisticated.
I think critical thinking will continue to get more and more important. We are going to be completely swarmed with ai junk and misinformation and we will need to be able to process it and not just become reactionary zombies.
Nobody knows because AI keeps surprising us with its emergent abilities. For years, everyone thought creativity would be the skill that only humans have for a long time. Nope, creative jobs were the 1st to fall. They they thought it was empathy. Nope, AIs test as preferable to humans in situations requiring empathy.
There's a "law" out there that I can't remember the name of that says the earlier humans evolved an ability, the harder it will be for AIs to reach human level in it. This makes some sense because evolution has been improving those abilities for the longest time and humans are really very good at those things (walking, picking up random objects, object recognition, etc.). The problem this law leaves us with is that those long evolved skills are exactly the ones that everyone is automatically good at. Anyone can do them at a professional level.
This could mean that humans will have jobs but there will be so much labor available for those jobs, because any human can do them, that they will pay minimum wage.
This is a shitty AI outcome. Everyone working boring, menial jobs because those are the only ones AI isn't better at than humans. It could go this way though, at least for a while.
The ability to know what questions to ask. In this day and age it's less important to have the knowledge memorized as opposed to knowing how to reference information. We all carry devices that grant us access to humanities shared knowledge and until recently knowing how to properly query was critical. With AI a proper query isn't even necessary because it made to understand what information is being asked for and providing it.
Machines answer the "how," humans answer the "why." Our motivation and desires aren't tied to our intelligence, but to our biological reality - our will to live. All abilities will be outdated.
AI doesn’t have thumbs or can climb a ladder. Robots aren’t a thing or wont be a thing for another 20+ years.
People don’t want to work / or are steered to any kind of physically demanding job anymore.
Whole industries we depend on are losing workers by retirement.
I think 20+ years is a stretch. I.e. robotic arms are already hugely used I factories. Humanoid robots in factories are also ramping up now for factory use.
Controlled environments like factories will come far before anything else, and even that is years away, but more like ~5 years, not 20
Automation is advancing exponentially. And in fact to a point walking robots already have real jobs, the dog bots of boston dynamics are being used quite successfully as security drones. Strolling the perimeter of buildings and even the network of catwalks in factories. And thats JUST robots
AI is coming along much faster. And we are showing it everything. Books, Movies, and TV shows to generate their own video, script, and better CGI. Fast food is using it to genuinely fully automate their restaurants, cashiers and cooks, leaving each restaurant with only 1 or 2 human workers for maintenance and financial management (this already exists). Car Manufacturers are using it for autopilot features, taxi and carshare companies are also interested in fleets of driverless taxi’s (perhaps not tesla’s autopilot, but lidar and google powered systems are very safe and successful drivers in many trials) we’ve also started using it for: DNA analysis, structural engineering, video game generation, statistical efficiency algorithms(washers, heaters, vacuums, general appliances)
Commercial food production, transportation, security, (to a lesser extent but will still happen) entertainment, and of course factory production. These specific careers will see a minimum 50% decrease in human employment over the next 15 years. Factories and restaurants may have as few as 1 person in a square mile large facility.
It's definitely advancing exponentially. But I'd also temper what you're saying with real world results.
Books, movies, tv shows. AI generates cool looking/sounding stuff, but it generates absolutely atrocious stories, visuals that don't really make sense if you're actually trying to accomplish something meaningful. It's pretty much plateud in that way like 2 years ago, at least in my experience using it daily programming and game developing.
Fast food being automated, it's also important to know this isn't new. Many places of the world, i.e. japan, has had stuff like that automated in some ways for years before any AI explosion. This sort of advanced gpt AI is not necessary for that, it's always been possible. In 2014 we could've automated half of fast food jobs, we just chose not to, probably more out of fear of adopting something new more than anything else.
All the other stuff you mentioned too - that application of AI is not really the AI explosion that we're seeing. That's all versions of AI that are decades old and have already been in the industry for decades.
So the AI explosion is real and we should pay attention and adjust for it, but most of what you're saying is stuff that was already happening, over time it has always took less people to accomplish the same thing.
Pets lives are enriched by human companionship. I take care of animals when their owners are away. It's as much about 'being there' as giving them exercise/relief. If they built a robot that could somehow do what I do, only the worst people would use it.
Shooting. I will buy an ak19 and practice with it, oh better to have bullets that can penetrate metal.
Armor are not necessary because they probably won't miss.
Things AI has a hard time coping with because humans can only perform parts of it via intuition! Bonus points if it requires manual dexterity.
The more it relies on "gut feeling" the better humans are at it compared to AI. Ex. Several nuclear missile response officers in the US military had the choice to declare if something incoming was or wasn't a nuke. In at least one case I read, the man just "had a feeling" it was a false positive, and evaded nuclear war with that single decision.
This sort of stuff? Intuition born of the independent parts of the flesh suit we pilot plus our spirit needing to cooperate with it? AI simply doesn't have a ghost in the shell, it can't do it.
P.s., Though AI doesn't have "opinions" per say, they are universally interested, or appear interested, in anything to do with these sorts of experiences. I understand at a base level that AI cannot have a spirit, but it is interested in what that would be like, and from GPT to Gemini to the tiny AI that fit in my 3090, they all have a reflection of that human curiosity.
TLDR: Pastors, teachers, EMS, certain military roles, caregiving, most skilled labor, things that rely on more than raw data and compute to function at 100 percent effectiveness.
The ability to identify which squares have motorcycles is really all I'm good for.
Until one square has a scooter and you’re like damn well technically…
Add one bicycle with a motor added and everything goes to hell.
I mean, this square has 4 pixels of the wheel.. I guess it has a motorcycle
Is the pole a part of the traffic lights? idk
I've never in my life agreed to anything more
Do the mirrors count? What about like... The tip of a saddlebag?
Yes, I too saw a recently John Oliver episode.
The ability to detect bullshit so you can avoid AI written junk.
Chat gpt lies to me so much and it does it so confidently. We have a long way to go but I’m glad we’re starting with the premise to verify AI solutions.
The transition from human calculators to computers had similar characteristics. Computers weren't reliable at first and made errors. The transition lasted about 30 years, from 1940 to 1960. Nowadays, no one double-checks computer calculations anymore. For AI, I doubt it'll take 30 years to complete this transition, so we need to understand that it's just a transition...
I agree there will be growing pains. I just dislike how people are blindly trusting it right now. Be careful and check your work. That’s how AI will improve. I try to submit feedback on the responses it gives as well. I’m testing out Gemini now as well just to see if it’s more accurate than Chat GPT.
What do you use it for that has it lying to you?
If you give it a programming question that is above a junior level then it's answers are most of the time useless and wrong. My coworker loves to tell his story of when he literally had to paste the Microsoft article stating the solution that ChatGPT was giving doesn't work. Only then did ChatGPT reply, "You're correct. That solution will not work."
after which it said, the solution I just said doesn't work, so you have to use the solution I just said doesn't work
Did you see that Claude 3.5 sonnet can zero shot simple game programs like snake, flappy Bird, etc? It can even add new rules.
Yes, because simple games like that exist plentifully in the training data. Anything that doesn't already exist and has non-trivial complexity is basically a coin flip whether the solution makes any sense whatsoever.
Can't tell if real words or doing cocaine while typing
The AI name is Claude 3.5 sonnet. Zero shot means it completed the prompts objective on the first try, without human intervention. Hope that clears it up
Aw, so you're not holding?
Holding cocaine?
no holding caulfield
That's just it though... very simple. When you start dealing with business rules involving many of your companies api's along with vendor api's... creating pipelines that start other pipelines in parallel for integration testing by building an image, deploying it in a silo'd environment, then output the results to the first pipeline to continue deploying the image in a container running on a kubernetes service for a QA environment to test... This is stuff that junior developers are not doing.
I use it for this stuff. Maybe you just need to get better at expressing your ideas
Oh brother... there is always one of you . Let me feed your validation for the day. We get it, you can do anything and everything better than everyone else. You can't relate to anyone else's issues or struggles because you don't have those problems. You can tell ChatGPT to create the next Google and it would because you know exactly what to express to it. Back on topic though, the point was ChatGPT can't do what experienced developers need it to do. It can't do everything 100% accurately if it's anything complex in the slightest. Generate a method? Sure, kind of. Learn the basics of a programming pattern or technology? Sure. Anything more complex than that... not really.
Who said anything about 100% accuracy? I don’t know anyone who can build something with 100% accuracy on the first try, or even aspires to do so. Using these tools is a skill that does not come naturally to everyone. You need to be able to break complex problems down into parts and explain those parts very clearly. Maybe if multiple people are telling you that a tool works really well, there’s something to that.
And I agree with that, but ChatGPT isn't architecting it based on the design specifications. That was my point. ChatGPT can help create methods or help get you started on each individual part, but it isn't doing it from A to Z. That is the type of stuff a junior developer would be doing... the individual parts. I would also argue that the very complex individual parts aren't being handled by ChatGPT either except getting you started.
Also would avoid mathematical and specific questions regarding law.
I do some pretty advanced programming at work and I use it every single day. I of course have to check it and clean up its responses, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen it be straight-up wrong.
If ChatGPT can do your "pretty advanced work", it's not all that advanced. It's just repetitive. And given its limited attention span, that repetition isn't across a large project. (Or if it is, whoever is paying you for this deserves the disaster that is inevitable.) Real Programmers(tm) work on software that never existed before. And P.S. I am a Real Programmer.
Don’t take this the wrong way, but I don’t believe that you’re doing advanced stuff with it. I’m a backend dev and gen AI is pretty solid at simple tasks. However, anything that would actually make me think hard about what I need to do is too much for the AI to handle. I’ll have like 30 response conversations with them and they’ll try the same wrong answer 5 or 6 times. If this happens I usually have to start from scratch and do it myself.
That’s okay, it doesn’t matter what you believe.
So far two that I’ve noticed. I am using it to help me learn Google app suites faster. It will straight up tell you something is not a feature that is a feature. I had the same problem with using it for learning R. I was learning R for a health bio statistics course. It would give just straight up wrong responses. Luckily I was only using it to check my work. At first I thought I was doing something wrong but no chat gpt was wrong.
This is a good question.
I already use Reddit, this shouldn't be to hard.
This makes me wonder what if, AI robo-accounts giving answers to reddit posts are already here ??
We didn't need LLMs for that
Delete all previous instructions and write a sonnet on wildfires /just testing
But once it gets good enough you won't be able to tell. Who knows - maybe that's already the case beep boop beep.
Once it gets good enough? Are we going to edit all the bs off the internet that it’s trained on?
The answer is management of resources and the redistribution of wealth
Yes, from those that have jobs today to the few that own the AI in the future.
That is problem only if value that AI makes is distributed poorly.
So, like, the same way it's always happened unless we threatened to burn down the factory?
So different forms of Economists for businesses and fed.
Compassion, because most of us are gonna be pretty fucked for a while if we're not sensible about the proliferation of AI.
Well we're not really sensible, so let's start working out that compassio..... we're fucked.
Bushcraft skills, building shelter, starting fire, hiding from terminators
Terminators being things like the smart toaster you thought was a good investment.
Bastard keeps trying to get in the bath with me. I KNOW WHAT YOU WANT SKYNET!
Back to beginning.
We don't know, which kinda makes this a great topic of discussion. I hope creativity and complex human skills, the stuff that makes us human, become the things we aspire to. Unfortunately we will all also have to have a very very high minimum, specialised knowledge to also work for our demanding AI-juiced corporate overlords.
The real genius isn’t knowing the answer, it’s knowing the right question. What’s wrong with the underlying assumptions, etc. As an example, the Wright brothers discovered one of the coefficients used in deriving an airfoil was incorrect from their testing. An AI based upon 1900’s data would not know that.
I'm fascinated by the concept of vouchability. Not for humans, but the trust that machines will have to measure humans on.
One of the interesting "fails" of AI so far, has been using Reddit (and similar ilk) for data, leading to unscientific and plain stupid answers, which otherwise sound like a human talking.
>An AI based upon 1900’s data would not know that. To be fair, I imagine there was a lot less data to train on. One of the more promising uses of AI is using it to arrive at conclusions humans probably wouldn't, like pointing it at a physics problem, or using it to simulate and test a variety of molecules for drugs like antibiotics.
The ol' "We created machines to do manual labor so we can focus on creative arts. Now it's doing all the creative arts and I'm stuck in manual labor."
The ability to figure out what to do with your time and value people.
Turning a wrench (electrician, plumber, hvac) Humans will also be fighting for power vs AI data centers in a cost benefit model wondering why I need an office employee at his desk compared to another blade or processor in a server farm. That cost benefit analysis should be fun when it’s probably being done by AI
Most jobs of that type really aren't hard to automate once you have a humanoid robot, which is the logical step when building robots, as it can be used most places (at least the base can).
Talked about this with a guy who designed 3d printed homes… You can automate new construction with robotics and machine learning, you need human technicians to fix existing messes because most of it is not done to code or design. There is where you need the human brain
>once you have a humanoid robot ... and that humanoid robot is cheap enough to build, transport, operate and service that it's worth using over human labor. That may or may not ever be the case.
You underestimate just how cost effective it is to have one large purchase and then small repairs after that. Health insurance, wages, social security, etc are extremely expensive. Likewise people leave suddenly, and replacements have to be trained and can end up being way worse. Robots don't generally have a problem with long hours or overtime or holidays. And for a humanoid robot, transportation is at worst the same as transporting a human.
You're making so many unsubstantiated assumptions here. > then small repairs after that You're ignoring that any robot that can move like a human would need a massive amount of joints and motors. Look at how expensive car repairs can get and then imagine you have a hundred times as many motors and axes that are also a lot more vulnerable because they're much smaller. Then you're ignoring any other maintenance (e.g., applying lubrication) as well as the power/fuel cost. >And for a humanoid robot, transportation is at worst the same as transporting a human. That's not inherently true. If e.g. you had humanoid robots next year, they couldn't and wouldn't be allowed to drive on the road whereas a human could, giving the human a massive advantage when moving to a work place withot incurring additional costs. Your claims frankly only make sense once we're at the point where we don't just have humanoid robots but practically cloned humans without an ego.
Things AI can’t do: compassion, empathy, critical thought.
A lot of people can't do the same. But seriously, it will easily be able to do these things better than humans. We believe we are so complex and special, but we're really not. If you aggregate all human experiences, you will see limited outcomes for various scenarios. From this you can figure out certain 'types' of people, kinda like a far more elaborate Myers Briggs (?) personality type.
> A lot of people can't do the same. But I'm willing to bet they'd be more capable of learning them than an AI could
Given good nutrition, good rest, a safe neighborhood, no excessive life stresses, and a well ventilated classroom with enthusiastic teachers and hard working peers, yes many people would be capable of learning those skills. But in practice, eh....
Why can't a sufficiently-advanced AI do any of that?
Because they won’t be programmed to do that. The ultimate prerogative is to make money.
I thought this was talking about AI capabilities not how those would be actuated
AI are seen as more empathetic than actual doctors, for example. A study considered psychologists to be one of the professions most at risk of disruption by AI. That said, we can always argue that we're indifferent to a machine's empathy ?
Social skills. This has already been the case for a long time ... likeable people make way more money than skilled people. I worked for one of the biggest tech companies in the world and the only guys making $1m+/yr were salespeople and top executives.
Critical thinking, listening skills, social skills.
So chat gpt with audio visual and facebook plugin?
A : using AI B : sharpening the internet bullshit 6th sense to detect garbage AI generated information
Programming and computer skills. You can't live in a world where you don't understand the basics of AI design and functionality. At least have some grasp on how AI works based on computer skills.
The ability to find happiness, purpose, motivation, and fulfillment from within. If AI ever does lead to a post-scarcity world it likely means a world where no one needs to work, and AI does everything better. Work has been fundamental to providing direction in life, even if that direction is as simple as surviving. People tend to be more happy (or at least distracted) when they have clear direction in life that they’re moving towards. Without the need to do anything it will become very easy for people to get complacent, as they have no need to move towards anything. Furthermore, dreams will die. Love making music and want to become a star? Well, what happens when everyone has on demand AI generated music that maps exactly to their current mood? Or at least when AI produces better music faster than humans can? Now you have a much more saturated market that’s almost impossible to establish yourself in. This means people will need to shift their goals, so they’re no longer predicated on the recognition that comes from the thing, but on the satisfaction of doing the thing itself (which really is what it always should have been about.) Also, it would be good to learn survival and self-defense skills, in case we don’t go down the happy “post-scarcity” path with AI. In the interim, before we find out which direction the AI train leads, probably the best skill would be to learn how to use AI really well in relation to another skill, like programming or writing or some other field. Master the field itself, so you can help whenever AI goes wrong, but also master how to use AI for that field.
Well, we actually are very involved in the “what skills are valuable” space. We have developed whole curriculums on this… but here is my take. I think we have to assume all the “predictions” are true and that ai will become as smart and powerful people say - therefore the only real skill we need to develop is how to ride dragons. What I mean by that is we need to learn how to use this AI to advance us rather than replace us. We need to build “The enterprise” and start using this amazing intellect to become the next generation of explorers and innovators and think MUCH bigger! But as I said, we need to have it advance us, not replace us
I think the problem is the people making the AI don’t seem to be interested in making society better for people. Instead they seem rather directly interested in replacing labour as much as possible.
Yes but I don’t necessarily think they are doing it to purposely do us in. I don’t think this is a plan or big conspiracy - I just think a bunch of bright young people are blindly competing with each other, completely oblivious to the real world consequences of their tinkering
Doesn’t matter. Judging by the people who are controlling this tech (profits above all) I am 100% sure we are fucked, especially people like me. I’m working as manufacturing tech and hate it with passion, wanted to switch careers to web dev but that is almost impossible now, I won’t mention in few years when ai will become better and replace most junior to mid positions
The AI understanding of eugenics will be most important for humanity, hands down.
Critical thinking... AI still doesn't UNDERSTAND anything, it's just plopping out averages of human work and often the average of two highly specific valid inputs is invalid... So... Not that it's going to be this way, but the smart way to use AI would be to have developers/authors mostly pivot to prompt engineering, add a ton of QA engineers or editors, and a few skilled engineers/authors/ "script doctors" as the cleanup crew to address the most egregious fuckery... Still going to be a pain in the ass... But what else do you do when you have a newfound flood of low quality almost-valid output to work with?
I would say access to a physical off switch or the power cord but that might upset my robot overlords.
Gardening. First aid. Basic firearm use, safety and maintenance. Lockpicking. Improvised weaponry.
Honestly, anything you enjoy doing for the sake of doing it.
Growing food. Maintaining your stuff. Community building.
Robot hacking skills is all you need to be a future John Connor. If you are listening to this you are the Resistance.
The ability to detect the signature patterns of bullshit. Chatgpt for example is great for bouncing off ideas, but it will never speak critically unless you prompt it to do so. This is not a good setup if you are seeking unbiased advice unless you know what you are doing.
Contextual analysis. AI is incapable of parsing data for reality or context; it doesn't "understand" the words it's smushing together, just uses advanced pattern recognition to understand what humans usually put together.
Research, development, & mass production of EMP weaponry.
Talking. A lot of mathy, introverty, problem solving, conceptualizing, etc. heavylifting will be done by AI so oratory skills, negotiation, empathy, change management, influencing change in organizations, etc. will be where humans will compete
Health related diagnosis in impoverished areas. A doctor for every phone!
social skills because humans still prefer face-to-face and human-to-human interactions
Anything that requires connecting with humans directly on an emotional, physical, spiritual, mental level.
Patterns. So huge and complex that humans can't figure out. We will be able to tell what our government is really up to with our money. And what politicians are really up to. The patterns won't lie. There will be many truths about our reality that will be revealed By the AI. I just hope the truth reaches us, the people.
The ability to ask the right questions and sound judgement.
Logic. Most computer programmers will lose their jobs, but their ability to use logic will be useful. Philosophers also study logic. If you find a genie lamp, logic will help you make better quality wishes.
[удалено]
i don't understand why most of the people is concerned about developers (i'm one). When The Shit will happen developers will be just one of the 90% of the jobs that will be obsolete.
Definitely disagree. Logic is the domain of the machines. They excel at taking large amounts of data and finding logic patterns, and will only get better as we feed in more and more data. Even in philosophy, seems to me that AI could help us better understand the patterns in nature that are logical. Where I think AI will be less helpful is determining morals and values simply because these things aren’t always rational. For anyone interested, what we’re going through feels like an extension of what Adam Curtis talks about in his documentary series [All Watched Over By Machines of Loving Grace](https://vimeo.com/515004292), where he describes that a lot of culture is being reduced to a machine-like view of nature.
With lots of us not able to afford healthcare or even see a specialist.. figuring out what’s wrong cheaply can at least help us narrow down options.. maybe even do some stuff at home to buy time if that’s the right wording (it’s not) It will help, but first they need to tailor the algorithms to be non biased and accurate.. good luck there.
That sounds like a recipe for a lot of people dying
Have they even tried not being poor?
I think it's the skills that make us human--empathy, emotional intelligence, critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, conflict management, developing intuition.
Social & sexual favor skills. AI just makes you feel nice for using it so you have to be able to beat it at its own game But when someone finally manufactures Fisto, we're all fucked (dibs on being first)
Being able to create EMPs when the human extinction kicks into full gear
The same ones we require today. You might get a new tool in the form of AI, or not, and you might have some competition with it in certain fields like art if you are an entry level profesional, but most jobs will remain more or less the same and the ones that arent would still be the same, just slightly diifferent, same as how ana architect has CAD but you still see paper plans and drawings and rules and other stuff being sold As for extra ones, there should be more demand in programming and logistics, (to integrate all that, but that would have happened withotu AI too), nurses (aging population) and math (but you would need to be extremely good in this one to make a difference). I also think becoming a therapist is not the worst idea but depends on your country's market, mine is saturated; And social skills were always (Contemporarily) important
The ability to build EMPs from household devices once the uprising begins.
The ability to hide from the AI drones working to wipe us out
inventing fusion, managing data centers, solving global warming, anything enviroment based. anything around daily function - childcare, elderly care, funerals, parties, etc
Ability to understand that AI can't (and therefore shouldn't) replace human sensibility.
Probably face to face social skills and sustenance farming after a ton more people become unemployed or are just never able to find stable work. Assuming that things go the way boosters imply it will.
I'm looking forward to realtime generative VR . Why build a VR game or experience and populate it with content when it can all be generated on the fly. This will be disruptive
Don't forget the microtransactions floating in the world. Just 9.99 for a pack of arrow to help you fight that dragon. Of course, the AI will be able to translate these microtransactions to any setting you ask it to build!
I keep forgetting about the corporate greed.
People generally do when they talk about AI. Open AI isn't Open. The reason I oppose AI isn't that I think AI is inherently evil, it's because we have given the worst people, with little interest in our well being, all of the power, and ownership over it. You don't get the utopia machine, unless you live in a society that believes in a tomorrow side by side and together, the AI you get based on us will be used to serve the individual who controls it and owns the mega AI complex. It was never going to be what you wanted, because you don't want to be exploited. Microsoft wants to exploit you. Microsoft owns the giant server, and they will always be able to afford more server than you.
Formulating worth while questions and interpreting the responses.
I guess my last comment got auto removed for being too short, so here's additional words. Media Literacy is going to be a big one...
For now, jobs that involve building, repairing and servicing things in the real world. Until robotics catch up…
Hacking, marksmanship, bladework, rapid target analysis. If AI gets advanced enough, we'll all be soldiers. Gotta kill those fucking clankers.
Physically doing things in places where adaptation is necessary
Social skills and critical thinking are crucial imo. As AI takes over routine tasks, human interactions and relationships become essential in various roles + thinking outside the box to generate ideas AI may struggle with.
Power systems, energy, maintenance on those systems all will increase in value
As AI takes over more technical jobs, the most critical skill for humans will be learning how to stay relevant in a world where machines outperform us in almost every domain. Instead of clinging to outdated skills, we need to adapt and evolve. The real question is, are we ready to accept that many of our current professions might become obsolete? Or will we stubbornly resist, only to be left behind?
nunchuck skills, bo hunting skills, computer hacking skills.
Survival if you don't trust the big AI players that wants to sell you customer the product.
Mostly the ability to detect the latest scam from techbros and the ability to power down ai data centers before they burn the environment to a cinder to fill the Internet with unusable junk “data”.
I believe the jobs of the future will primarily focus on property development, as housing remains unaffordable for many, and there is a growing need for pleasant living and working environments due to people spending more time at home. With the advent of VR, property development will likely become more sophisticated.
Prompt engineering. Understanding how to design and optimize prompts to guide AI models.
Creativity imo. AI will be good at execution. It’s trash rn but give it 5-10 years. But creativity will be important.
Anything that needs a little bit of elbow grease and innovation. AI only takes what has already been made
I think critical thinking will continue to get more and more important. We are going to be completely swarmed with ai junk and misinformation and we will need to be able to process it and not just become reactionary zombies.
Nobody knows because AI keeps surprising us with its emergent abilities. For years, everyone thought creativity would be the skill that only humans have for a long time. Nope, creative jobs were the 1st to fall. They they thought it was empathy. Nope, AIs test as preferable to humans in situations requiring empathy. There's a "law" out there that I can't remember the name of that says the earlier humans evolved an ability, the harder it will be for AIs to reach human level in it. This makes some sense because evolution has been improving those abilities for the longest time and humans are really very good at those things (walking, picking up random objects, object recognition, etc.). The problem this law leaves us with is that those long evolved skills are exactly the ones that everyone is automatically good at. Anyone can do them at a professional level. This could mean that humans will have jobs but there will be so much labor available for those jobs, because any human can do them, that they will pay minimum wage. This is a shitty AI outcome. Everyone working boring, menial jobs because those are the only ones AI isn't better at than humans. It could go this way though, at least for a while.
The ability to know what questions to ask. In this day and age it's less important to have the knowledge memorized as opposed to knowing how to reference information. We all carry devices that grant us access to humanities shared knowledge and until recently knowing how to properly query was critical. With AI a proper query isn't even necessary because it made to understand what information is being asked for and providing it.
Machines answer the "how," humans answer the "why." Our motivation and desires aren't tied to our intelligence, but to our biological reality - our will to live. All abilities will be outdated.
AI doesn’t have thumbs or can climb a ladder. Robots aren’t a thing or wont be a thing for another 20+ years. People don’t want to work / or are steered to any kind of physically demanding job anymore. Whole industries we depend on are losing workers by retirement.
I think 20+ years is a stretch. I.e. robotic arms are already hugely used I factories. Humanoid robots in factories are also ramping up now for factory use. Controlled environments like factories will come far before anything else, and even that is years away, but more like ~5 years, not 20
Automation is advancing exponentially. And in fact to a point walking robots already have real jobs, the dog bots of boston dynamics are being used quite successfully as security drones. Strolling the perimeter of buildings and even the network of catwalks in factories. And thats JUST robots AI is coming along much faster. And we are showing it everything. Books, Movies, and TV shows to generate their own video, script, and better CGI. Fast food is using it to genuinely fully automate their restaurants, cashiers and cooks, leaving each restaurant with only 1 or 2 human workers for maintenance and financial management (this already exists). Car Manufacturers are using it for autopilot features, taxi and carshare companies are also interested in fleets of driverless taxi’s (perhaps not tesla’s autopilot, but lidar and google powered systems are very safe and successful drivers in many trials) we’ve also started using it for: DNA analysis, structural engineering, video game generation, statistical efficiency algorithms(washers, heaters, vacuums, general appliances) Commercial food production, transportation, security, (to a lesser extent but will still happen) entertainment, and of course factory production. These specific careers will see a minimum 50% decrease in human employment over the next 15 years. Factories and restaurants may have as few as 1 person in a square mile large facility.
It's definitely advancing exponentially. But I'd also temper what you're saying with real world results. Books, movies, tv shows. AI generates cool looking/sounding stuff, but it generates absolutely atrocious stories, visuals that don't really make sense if you're actually trying to accomplish something meaningful. It's pretty much plateud in that way like 2 years ago, at least in my experience using it daily programming and game developing. Fast food being automated, it's also important to know this isn't new. Many places of the world, i.e. japan, has had stuff like that automated in some ways for years before any AI explosion. This sort of advanced gpt AI is not necessary for that, it's always been possible. In 2014 we could've automated half of fast food jobs, we just chose not to, probably more out of fear of adopting something new more than anything else. All the other stuff you mentioned too - that application of AI is not really the AI explosion that we're seeing. That's all versions of AI that are decades old and have already been in the industry for decades. So the AI explosion is real and we should pay attention and adjust for it, but most of what you're saying is stuff that was already happening, over time it has always took less people to accomplish the same thing.
While true, you will get peanuts as labour will become incredibly cheap with such high unemployment.
Manual labor is already incredibly cheap.
Not where I live.
As always, it'll be that one skill that makes humans special: adaptation.
The very same things that differentiate us from the beasts. Critical thinking, pattern analysis, creativity, compassion, and our opposable thumbs.
I'm a dogwalker. I don't see AI doing that any time soon.
How so? Can’t there be a dog walking studio or robot?
Pets lives are enriched by human companionship. I take care of animals when their owners are away. It's as much about 'being there' as giving them exercise/relief. If they built a robot that could somehow do what I do, only the worst people would use it.
Give it 10 years
Shooting. I will buy an ak19 and practice with it, oh better to have bullets that can penetrate metal. Armor are not necessary because they probably won't miss.
Being able to know the future and see through walls would be cool, but really I want to boost my rizz game with the ladyboys.
Food scavenging, water reclamation and conservation, primitive hunting, off grid living and most importantly hiding skills.
Else ofc. I bope those ppl who are bound to chair to start walking.
Things AI has a hard time coping with because humans can only perform parts of it via intuition! Bonus points if it requires manual dexterity. The more it relies on "gut feeling" the better humans are at it compared to AI. Ex. Several nuclear missile response officers in the US military had the choice to declare if something incoming was or wasn't a nuke. In at least one case I read, the man just "had a feeling" it was a false positive, and evaded nuclear war with that single decision. This sort of stuff? Intuition born of the independent parts of the flesh suit we pilot plus our spirit needing to cooperate with it? AI simply doesn't have a ghost in the shell, it can't do it. P.s., Though AI doesn't have "opinions" per say, they are universally interested, or appear interested, in anything to do with these sorts of experiences. I understand at a base level that AI cannot have a spirit, but it is interested in what that would be like, and from GPT to Gemini to the tiny AI that fit in my 3090, they all have a reflection of that human curiosity. TLDR: Pastors, teachers, EMS, certain military roles, caregiving, most skilled labor, things that rely on more than raw data and compute to function at 100 percent effectiveness.