November 14, 2014
In UK 35% Of Existing Jobs To Be Automated In 20 Years

More robots and computers replacing human labor.

But a new study by professional services firm Deloitte has quantified the rate of destruction for the U.K. jobs market over the next 20 years – predicting that around one-third (35 per cent) of existing jobs across the U.K. are under high risk of replacement via automation over this time period.

The study authors claim those the lower paying jobs will get laid off at 5 times the rate of higher paying jobs. During the industrial revolution demand for factory workers rose as machines became more productive because the value of human labor was enhanced by what the humans, using machines, could produce. But in the current era the machines are getting smarter and more autonomous.

What is telling: chart 4 shows that since year 2000 in manufacturing employment has increased for advanced degree holders while going down for everyone else. The size of the decline is most severe for high school drop-outs. This pattern is going to repeat in a growing list of industries.

Some dark factories (a.k.a. lights-out factories) have no humans on the factory floor for substantial lengths of time. Technicians still come in to do repairs or rearrange the equipment. The rest of the time machines do all the work. Robots are moving into more industries. Dark warehouses are coming next. Distribution is getting automated in warehouses.

Such advances in manufacturing are also beginning to transform other sectors that employ millions of workers around the world. One is distribution, where robots that zoom at the speed of the world’s fastest sprinters can store, retrieve and pack goods for shipment far more efficiently than people. Robots could soon replace workers at companies like C & S Wholesale Grocers, the nation’s largest grocery distributor, which has already deployed robot technology.

We can not simply extrapolate from a graph of the last N years to say what the world will be like 20 years from now. Discontinuities happen. Suddenly some development will depart from trend. This could mean that robots do not advance as some expect. But with many new kinds of gadgets there is an S-shaped curve where suddenly adoption goes up sharply when a technology reaches a level of maturity that makes it broadly useful. This has happened with PCs and cell phones for example.

My expectation: The ranks of unemployed and not looking for work will continue to grow. The work ethic is weakening and demand for government support to enable a non-working life will grow as the work ethnic declines.

Robots are going to enable capitalists to move capital out of high population countries as a way to avoid taxes, regulations, and political instability. Why put your factory at political risk of electric power cut-offs when politicians regulate an electric market in a way that puts sufficient power supply at risk? Why put your factory at risk of redistributionist taxes? I think the managers of capital will use automation to enable greater capital mobility and flight from political risk.

Only tariffs and transportation costs can reduce the flight of capital by making imports from robotic islands cost more. But if the most affluent people who have the money to buy the output of factories decide to move across borders to get outside of tariff zones then the tariffs won't be effective in keeping the factories from fleeing. We could end up in a future where a small highly skilled fraction of the world's population live in small offshore refuge countries which have more robots than humans.

Share |      Randall Parker, 2014 November 14 11:46 AM 


Comments
Wolf-Dog said at November 14, 2014 11:25 PM:

Randall Parker said:
1) The ranks of unemployed and not looking for work will continue to grow. The work ethic is weakening and demand for government support to enable a non-working life will grow as the work ethnic declines.
2) Robots are going to enable capitalists to move capital out of high population countries as a way to avoid taxes, regulations, and political instability. We could end up in a future where a small highly skilled fraction of the world's population live in small offshore refuge countries which have more robots than humans.

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

1) Although the work ethic of the unskilled groups would decline, the work ethic of the skilled groups will actually increase. And if a new source of energy is discovered or developed, then there will be no limit to the capabilities of robots to feed even the poor, with only a small amount of taxes paid by the upper class, because the bread crumbs will become much bigger than ever.

2) There is no question that there will be some incentive to move both the capital and the robot factories to small offshore refuge countries, but although history does not duplicate itself, it does repeat itself, and so the fate of the fabulously wealthy city-state of Lydia is to be remembered. Croesus, who was the King of Lydia was very proud of the economic and cultural success of his country, but he naively neglected the fact that this wealth would attract the attention of Persian Empire, which invaded and looted Lydia. Thus, if the futuristic refuge country gets formed, it better have a military that is far more powerful than any other nation. So this hypothetical elite robot country populated by an elite, will have to make alliances with rich and powerful countries if it wants to survive. Also, it turns out that most of the income of the elite, is from using the robots to manufacture goods and services for the majority, not just for themselves. Robotized Tesla companies in the future, will not just make money from selling to the upper class, but also from selling to the middle class and even the poor. Selling just to the top 1 % would actually slows down the growth of the elite economy. Thus there will also a symbiotic relationship between the elite robot country and the rest of the world.

bob sykes said at November 15, 2014 4:24 AM:

The temptation for the left-behind people and countries to use military forces to seize the factories, capital and goods would be overwhelming. Think Nazi Germany writ large.

Randall Parker said at November 15, 2014 9:41 AM:

Wolf-Dog, bob sykes,

Would robotic islands be easy prey? Maybe not: robotic defenses for robotic islands seem like an obvious responses. Plus, a robotic island could form an alliance with some nations which have lots of natural resources (since the resources would be needed for manufacturing anyway). The biggest difficulty I see: keeping shipping lanes open for trade. But do not underestimate the cunning of capitalists on those islands to play off rival countries against each other and to corrupt political elites in countries to get allies.

I picture a future where the bigger countries will try to hold their most technically skilled citizens (really, subjects) hostage to work on building robotic factories to feed and clothe the masses. The best young engineers will try to get themselves smuggled out in freighters or perhaps in fishing boats. Or they'll pretend they want to go to a scientific conference in Switzerland and then once in the Zurich airport grab a flight for Iceland or perhaps Greenland (which will be a lot greener as the planet warms).

Perhaps the Falklands will become a robotic factory hub too. Or how about Saint Helena"? Another interesting choice: the Kerguelen Islands which have over 2700 square miles of area in the south Indian ocean. Perhaps the Kerguelens have a lot of mineral resources?

If governments start restricting access to rejuvenation therapies then these robotic islands could also serve as refuges for the wealthy to become young again.

Abelard Lindsey said at November 15, 2014 3:25 PM:

I'm supposed to get a major contract to upgrade the automation (20 plus years old) for a major warehouse. This is the automation (PLC's and VFD's) to run all of the conveyors and robots as well as the SCADA upgrade. We're also supposed to get a major refrigeration project as well. Both of these will be in March of next year, if we get them. We use AB Controllogix for the PLC's and remote I/O and either powerflex or ABB for the drives (VFD's). The SCADA will likely be Wonderware (although we would like to use either Seimens or Inductive).

Warehouses are becoming automated along with manufacturing facilities. Making this happen is what I do for a living.

Control systems and industrial automation is my bread and butter skill.

I like to use Omron's NJ series with Sysmac studio for robotics and motion control applications. I hope to get some semiconductor work with this.

The recession ended over two years ago for me. The automation business is very busy right now. My work is going good.

Not many young people have gone into automation over the past 2 decades. There are various reasons for this. Pursuit of engineering degrees (real engineering such as ChemE, EE, ME, etc. - not IT) has declined over the past two decades. Young people have gone more for software/IT/networking. Industrial and factory automation is not appealing to many young people for another reason. We spend lots of time in the field on customer site. This means being in uncomfortable environments, either hot or cold, that can be noisy as well. Most places are a lot cleaner these days. So dirtiness is not so common now. Most educated young people I think like to work in comfortable offices instead.

There are a fair number of young people in the sales and marketing areas of automation. Most of the engineers are "grey-hair" types.

Abelard Lindsey said at November 15, 2014 3:28 PM:

Sometimes, while working on a project, I can even get into a sort of "bubble". In this bubble, I can almost pretend that I am on Chiron, the engineering based anarcho-capitalist culture described in James P Hogan's "Voyage from Yesteryear". My bubble is pierced when either I read the internet news, deal with some idiot (usually outside of work), or pay my taxes.

Randall Parker said at November 15, 2014 3:42 PM:

Abelard Lindsey,

With all this direct work experience you've got to tell us some stuff. Like how much reduction in labor has happened in warehouses over the last 10-15 years? How many people work in a warehouse now and same building 6, 8, 10, 12 years ago? Can you think of examples you've seen to give us a sense of how much labor has been reduced?

Also, does the automation speed up the movement of goods thru warehouses? Does the same amount of warehouse space get a faster turnover rate?

Also, is there any modest manufacturing integrated into warehouses to combine components to ship out a custom piece of equipment assembled on demand from components in the warehouse when the order comes in?

Also, does automation enable goods to be kept in a larger number of warehouses closer to customers?

Also, how much automation in the loading and unloading of trucks? Has that advanced by much?

Wolf-Dog said at November 15, 2014 8:40 PM:

Randall Parker wrote:
"
1) I picture a future where the bigger countries will try to hold their most technically skilled citizens (really, subjects) hostage to work on building robotic factories to feed and clothe the masses. The best young engineers will try to get themselves smuggled out in freighters or perhaps in fishing boats. Or they'll pretend they want to go to a scientific conference in Switzerland and then once in the Zurich airport grab a flight for Iceland or perhaps Greenland (which will be a lot greener as the planet warms).

2)Perhaps the Falklands will become a robotic factory hub too. Or how about Saint Helena"? Another interesting choice: the Kerguelen Islands which have over 2700 square miles of area in the south Indian ocean. Perhaps the Kerguelens have a lot of mineral resources?

3)If governments start restricting access to rejuvenation therapies then these robotic islands could also serve as refuges for the wealthy to become young again. "

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////

1) The Soviet Union definitely had a policy of keeping especially their scientists as prisoners. But the Soviet scientists defected not just for better job opportunities but also for personal freedom, and the Soviet Union correctly perceived them as military assets. As we speak, although there are high taxes for the highest earners in Western countries, it turns out that the cognitive elite still enjoy a lot of freedoms, and the current welfare system in the US actually makes the cognitive elite richer, and NOT poorer, the reason being that all the government deficit spending that feeds the poor majority, actually ends up going to the bank accounts of the rich (which includes the cognitive elite except some pathological smart people who chose to be poor for one reason or another), because when the poor majority spend that money given to them by the government (borrowed from the rich), then the poor buy goods and services from the rich, giving that money to the rich before even the government bonds that the government gave to the rich reach maturity. This means that the total income of the rich is proportional to the government deficit spending. I would say that 90 % of the jobs at Google and Microsoft would disappear if the government deficit spending stops because the poor majority will no longer have any money to buy goods and services and the world will collapse into abject medieval feudal poverty of the lowest moribund order. For this reason, despite the high taxes, the rich keep getting richer as we speak, and therefore it is in the interest of the productive types of rich people (mostly cognitive elite people) to stay in the US, while the pure capitalists who only make money from financial operations might prefer being in tax-free places.

2) Robotics is is also integrated with other sciences. It is the entire science and engineering structure that counts, and also the entire social freedom in the US, which is still very good despite the current threats to regulate internet pricing schemes, etc. There are hundreds of good universities innovating in robotics, and the world is making great progress. The bread crumbs are becoming big enough to feed the masses without offending the elite too much. The only barrier to total prosperity is the danger that no new energy source will be invented to feed the robots! But as we speak, there is some progress in new biofuels derived from genetically engineered plants, new solar energy, thorium nuclear energy,

3) It is possible that governments might restrict rejuvenation therapies, but rejuvenation would increase the economic productivity of well-educated and already skilled workers, and this would be a boost to the economy, and so it won't be very draconian immediately. Only Frankenstein experiments might be regulated, as any long term damage to the DNA might contaminate the DNA of the majority. The more likely thing to get regulated severely, would be eugenics, but again, this depends on what kind of eugenics we are talking about. The poorer classes would also favor using genetics to improve the capabilities of their offspring. Temporarily the elite will have more money to get the best genetic treatments for rejuvenation and eugenics, but the same benefits will also trickle down to the poor.

Finally, places like Singapore where the rich pay very little taxes, see a rising poverty, due to the competitive system that starves out the ones who fall behind: after all, if the average IQ of the genetically enhanced future young generation becomes 190, then the majority of Google engineers will discover that they are slowly but surely joining the underclass even if their average IQ is 160. But on the other hand, as long as the population increase is under control, the prosperity will increase thanks to robotics and the bread crumbs will be plentiful and large enough to uplift the poor to make everybody happy without offending the rich. As we speak, the average fertility of women in all western countries is below maintenance and the population will actually decline without immigration. The real estate lobby, and other lobbies are obviously in favor of high immigration so that the housing prices remain high, but overall, if the rest of the world also adopt population control like in the western countries, there will be no problem. Only Africa and religiously backward places still have birth rates above maintenance.

Wolf-Dog said at November 15, 2014 8:41 PM:

Randall Parker wrote:
"
1) I picture a future where the bigger countries will try to hold their most technically skilled citizens (really, subjects) hostage to work on building robotic factories to feed and clothe the masses. The best young engineers will try to get themselves smuggled out in freighters or perhaps in fishing boats. Or they'll pretend they want to go to a scientific conference in Switzerland and then once in the Zurich airport grab a flight for Iceland or perhaps Greenland (which will be a lot greener as the planet warms).

2)Perhaps the Falklands will become a robotic factory hub too. Or how about Saint Helena"? Another interesting choice: the Kerguelen Islands which have over 2700 square miles of area in the south Indian ocean. Perhaps the Kerguelens have a lot of mineral resources?

3)If governments start restricting access to rejuvenation therapies then these robotic islands could also serve as refuges for the wealthy to become young again. "

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////

1) The Soviet Union definitely had a policy of keeping especially their scientists as prisoners. But the Soviet scientists defected not just for better job opportunities but also for personal freedom, and the Soviet Union correctly perceived them as military assets. As we speak, although there are high taxes for the highest earners in Western countries, it turns out that the cognitive elite still enjoy a lot of freedoms, and the current welfare system in the US actually makes the cognitive elite richer, and NOT poorer, the reason being that all the government deficit spending that feeds the poor majority, actually ends up going to the bank accounts of the rich (which includes the cognitive elite except some pathological smart people who chose to be poor for one reason or another), because when the poor majority spend that money given to them by the government (borrowed from the rich), then the poor buy goods and services from the rich, giving that money to the rich before even the government bonds that the government gave to the rich reach maturity. This means that the total income of the rich is proportional to the government deficit spending. I would say that 90 % of the jobs at Google and Microsoft would disappear if the government deficit spending stops because the poor majority will no longer have any money to buy goods and services and the world will collapse into abject medieval feudal poverty of the lowest moribund order. For this reason, despite the high taxes, the rich keep getting richer as we speak, and therefore it is in the interest of the productive types of rich people (mostly cognitive elite people) to stay in the US, while the pure capitalists who only make money from financial operations might prefer being in tax-free places.

2) Robotics is is also integrated with other sciences. It is the entire science and engineering structure that counts, and also the entire social freedom in the US, which is still very good despite the current threats to regulate internet pricing schemes, etc. There are hundreds of good universities innovating in robotics, and the world is making great progress. The bread crumbs are becoming big enough to feed the masses without offending the elite too much. The only barrier to total prosperity is the danger that no new energy source will be invented to feed the robots! But as we speak, there is some progress in new biofuels derived from genetically engineered plants, new solar energy, thorium nuclear energy,

3) It is possible that governments might restrict rejuvenation therapies, but rejuvenation would increase the economic productivity of well-educated and already skilled workers, and this would be a boost to the economy, and so it won't be very draconian immediately. Only Frankenstein experiments might be regulated, as any long term damage to the DNA might contaminate the DNA of the majority. The more likely thing to get regulated severely, would be eugenics, but again, this depends on what kind of eugenics we are talking about. The poorer classes would also favor using genetics to improve the capabilities of their offspring. Temporarily the elite will have more money to get the best genetic treatments for rejuvenation and eugenics, but the same benefits will also trickle down to the poor.

Finally, places like Singapore where the rich pay very little taxes, see a rising poverty, due to the competitive system that starves out the ones who fall behind: after all, if the average IQ of the genetically enhanced future young generation becomes 190, then the majority of Google engineers will discover that they are slowly but surely joining the underclass even if their average IQ is 160. But on the other hand, as long as the population increase is under control, the prosperity will increase thanks to robotics and the bread crumbs will be plentiful and large enough to uplift the poor to make everybody happy without offending the rich. As we speak, the average fertility of women in all western countries is below maintenance and the population will actually decline without immigration. The real estate lobby, and other lobbies are obviously in favor of high immigration so that the housing prices remain high, but overall, if the rest of the world also adopt population control like in the western countries, there will be no problem. Only Africa and religiously backward places still have birth rates above maintenance.

James Bowery said at November 16, 2014 5:53 AM:

My experience of the uber rich is that they are subject to bioweapons known as sycophants. These bioweapons are highly evolved in some cultures that have been immigrating to the west, forming a comforting bubble around the uber rich within which they are effectively digested. These cultures will become the new uber rich, inheriting the quasi-land rights and associated rent streams. The premiere private sector rent-stream company, Microsoft, has already been taken over by one of these immigrants: Satya Nadella. The mythology of the "vibrant immigrant entrepreneur" will cover the true dynamic at work. So the real question is what happens when the advanced technology culture of the West has been inherited by these older, highly stratified, immigrant cultures that have so contributed to the destruction of the West's middle class? Will they _really_ be able to sustain their positions without more overtly mopping up the remnants of the West? Can they do this if remnants such as the white working class men that have lost their jobs to ethnic nepotism start joining organizations like ISIS? It seems a very risky proposition to say that the sycophant/caste cultures can protect their loot simply by relocating critical infrastructure, such as silicon fabs, to islands.

For an example of how deeply degraded a society can become by driving out its Western technologists with ethnic nepotism, look at Africa's behavior -- particularly Zimbabwe where I visited during the summer of 2000. At that time, the guys I stayed with still thought that they could tough it out because there was such a need for technical skills and that the nepotism had driven away all the technical talent that Mugabe could afford to drive away. They are now, themselves, gone.

James Bowery said at November 16, 2014 5:54 AM:

My experience of the uber rich is that they are subject to bioweapons known as sycophants. These bioweapons are highly evolved in some cultures that have been immigrating to the west, forming a comforting bubble around the uber rich within which they are effectively digested. These cultures will become the new uber rich, inheriting the quasi-land rights and associated rent streams. The premiere private sector rent-stream company, Microsoft, has already been taken over by one of these immigrants: Satya Nadella. The mythology of the "vibrant immigrant entrepreneur" will cover the true dynamic at work. So the real question is what happens when the advanced technology culture of the West has been inherited by these older, highly stratified, immigrant cultures that have so contributed to the destruction of the West's middle class? Will they _really_ be able to sustain their positions without more overtly mopping up the remnants of the West? Can they do this if remnants such as the white working class men that have lost their jobs to ethnic nepotism start joining organizations like ISIS? It seems a very risky proposition to say that the sycophant/caste cultures can protect their loot simply by relocating critical infrastructure, such as silicon fabs, to islands.

For an example of how deeply degraded a society can become by driving out its Western technologists with ethnic nepotism, look at Africa's behavior -- particularly Zimbabwe where I visited during the summer of 2000. At that time, the guys I stayed with still thought that they could tough it out because there was such a need for technical skills and that the nepotism had driven away all the technical talent that Mugabe could afford to drive away. They are now, themselves, gone.

Abelard Lindsey said at November 17, 2014 3:54 PM:

Randall,

A typical warehouse has about 15-20 people working in it. They mostly drive fork-lifts, loading and unloading trucks. The rest of the warehouse is automated (pallets bearing goods are automatically stocked by robot cranes in shelves that go a 100 feet high. The only part of the ware house that uses human employees is the fork-lift drivers. Automating the fork-lifts will occur, but not soon. The reason is a lack of decent machine vision. Indeed, it is a lack of machine vision that holds all of automation and robotics back in all areas of automation. Effective machine vision is hard. Even humans take about 2 years to learn how to see.

Nick G said at November 18, 2014 12:21 PM:

Randall,

The 35% reduction over 20 years is perfectly normal. That's an annual decrease of only 2.1% - very much within the normal range of labor productivity increase.

Historically, old industries become mature (they reach a plateau of production), after which employment declines as labor productivity continues to grow. We've seen that in many industries. When manufacturing was growing, agricultural employment was declining: people in ag were saying the same doom & gloom things that we now hear from manufacturing. The same thing is now happening to manufacturing: output is flat, so employment is declining.

The question is: what's the new sector that will grow? It ought to be healthcare (especially drugs & devices). Unfortunately, market incumbents, both in other sectors and within healthcare itself, are fighting that.

Nick G said at November 18, 2014 12:31 PM:

The idea that the future holds islands of rich people who own all the manufacturing is backward-looking. It's like a plantation owner of the 1850's predicing that the future would be dominated by highly efficient cotton farmers.

Instead, as old sectors shrink, they become less important. Competition forces prices down as labor content shrinks, so that the benefits go to consumers, not producers. Let me say that again: as costs go down, so do prices. If prices aren't falling then...costs aren't falling as much as you think. Perhaps labor has partially moved to manufacturing and maintaining the robots.

Look at Apple: they make the money, not Foxconn.

Also, look at the latest advances in 3-D printing - those factory owners won't be able to control that.

Ronald Brak said at November 18, 2014 7:43 PM:

Any low tax robotopias aren't going to be able to charge good prices for their exports. "What's that, Robotopia? You are raising the prices on your high-tech doowhackies and flanges? Well, we'll just open our own robotic factories and make them ourselves. In fact, Robo Bill Gates will probably give us the seed robotic manufacturing capacity since he has nothing better to do with his money now he is an immortal god living in robo cyberspace."

James Bowery said at November 19, 2014 7:19 AM:

Nick G, you just provided a self defeating argument:

"Competition forces prices down as labor content shrinks..."

Since the vast majority of the consumer base receives their money from their labor, you go on to say:

"...the benefits go to consumers".

There is a bit of arithmetic to be done here to show that the prices shrink faster than the consumer base shrinks. However, when we say "prices", please don't get into the genocidal definition of "consumer price index" that is based on anything other than the cost of replacement reproduction costs, resulting in nightmarish political economic disasters such as the collapse of the middle class along with its total fertility rate so severe that it "justifies" race replacement immigration.

Nick G said at November 19, 2014 11:30 AM:

Ron,

Exactly.

James,

Consumers don't have to get their money from *manufacturing*. This is similar to farm labor say, 100 years ago. People were leaving the farm, and total farm sector income was shrinking. Now, less than 2% of the population works on the farm, and food prices today are lower than they've ever been (so low that our primary food-related health problem is obesity).

James Bowery said at November 19, 2014 1:54 PM:

Nick G, if you view the video at the link I provided on the collapse of the middle class, its clear that you're evading the central question which really gets back to the iron law of wages as it applies in the modern era:

If the advantages of higher productivity are trickling down in anything resembling a reasonable way, one would expect that the income to a family would at least be keeping pace with the cost of replacing the parents with equally viable children. It is clear from Elizabeth Warren's work that the inflation adjustments being done by our government are not simply wrong, they are genocidally wrong. Especially since women have entered the workforce the risk adjusted income of two income families has drastically fallen in real terms where "real" means the kind of secure subsistence required to rear children to equally viable adulthood. I'm being repetitive on this definition of inflation because the genocide denial built into the zeitgeist is so ensconced that virtually no one but Elizabeth Warren has talked about the actual numbers in a well-researched way, and not even Elizabeth Warren talks about the race replacement that has occured in the US as a consequence.

Arguments such as yours, which I've heard from all of the "trickle down" proponents including Ron Paul, are genocide denial. The facts and now boots on the ground in race replacement are deniable only because we are living in a regime where the elites hate their own population.

Abelard Lindsey said at November 20, 2014 9:11 AM:

I am teaching myself "deep Learning". It is rather difficult but something I feel I need to learn. Deep learning is the technology that, I think, will lead to effective machine vision that will enable all kinds of robotics capabilities. I think Google's Deep Mind technologies start-up is focusing on deep learning network algorithms for AI applications. The name itself implies such.

IBM has developed a new "neuromorphic" chip. I think this chip, combined with deep learning algorithms, might also result in effective machine vision and robotics capabilities.

Nick G said at November 20, 2014 9:47 AM:

James,

I agree that benefits from increases in labor productivity in the *overall* economy have gone to the wealthy over the last 40 years, and that median incomes have stagnated. That's not relevant to the analysis of a single sector. Some sectors shrink, others grow: that's what we're talking about here.

Abelard,

I'm starting to worry about the risk of runaway AI more, as I see more capable, self-teaching programs.

Any thoughts?

James Bowery said at November 20, 2014 7:17 PM:

No median income did not "stagnate" in real terms. If wages had stagnated in real terms we would have seen replacement reproduction among the boomers. Instead we have race replacement via treasonous immigration of the boomers. That's the genocide which the zeitgeist is (and you keep) denying.

There have been hundreds of movies made about "The Holocaust" and not a single movie has been nor will be made about this genocide despite it being of a far greater magnitude and far more current -- having occurred over the last 2 generations.

Abelard Lindsey said at November 20, 2014 9:15 PM:

I'm starting to worry about the risk of runaway AI more, as I see more capable, self-teaching programs.

Any thoughts?

No, I'm not too concerned about this. The deep learning stuff will likely lead to machine vision that actually works. Integrating with motion control will make for robots that are actually useful for many tasks. I don't think it will lead to sentient AI any time soon.

Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

                       
Go Read More Posts On FuturePundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©