Some questions...Question #1:

Ross Dolan said:
Hey, JD.

I agree...some things can be better done by humans. But this is a question about jobs for which a machine CAN be devised.

On average do you suppose that IF a machine can be devised to do a job...IN YOUR OPINION will the machine be more productive at the job than would a human?

I appreciate your contribution whether you can go further or not.
Click to expand...
Machines and humans are kind of equal in productivity but one machine can do the job of many. They don't need regular breaks either, just some routine maintenance. If you want an example of a machine that outperforms humans look no further than a cherry shaker. One machine can do the work of many workers and in a shorter amount of time.
 
In the West Bank the illegal Zionist occupiers have installed AI-controlled AUTONOMOUS camera-guns that shoot Palestinian civilians acting in a manner that the machine considers to be suspicious. They don't miss and no murders can be attributed to human error as no humans are involved- thus there are no prosecutions and justice is never served.
As the object of the exercise is to murder with impunity then yes, the machine is more ' productive ' than any human.

These machines - and the mindsets that produce such horrors - are made possible through financial gifts to genocidal Jews funded by taxing American workers.

I'm with Sarah Connor. Kill the robots.

th


90
 
Last edited:
moon said:
In the West Bank the illegal Zionist occupiers have installed AI-controlled AUTONOMOUS camera-guns that shoot Palestinian civilians acting in a manner that the machine considers to be suspicious. They don't miss and no murders can be attributed to human error as no humans are involved- thus there are no prosecutions and justice is never served.
As the object of the exercise is to murder with impunity then yes, the machine is more ' productive ' than any human.

These machines - and the mindsets that produce such horrors - are made possible through financial gifts to genocidal Jews funded by taxing American workers.

I'm with Sarah Connor. Kill the robots.

th


90
Click to expand...


In the West Bank the illegal Zionist occupiers have installed AI-controlled AUTONOMOUS camera-guns that shoot Palestinian civilians acting in a manner that the machine considers to be suspicious. They don't miss and no murders can be attributed to human error as no humans are involved- thus there are no prosecutions and justice is never served.
As the object of the exercise is to murder with impunity then yes, the machine is more ' productive ' than any human.

These machines - and the mindsets that produce such horrors - are made possible through financial gifts to genocidal Jews funded by taxing American workers.

I'm with Sarah Connor. Kill the robots.

th


90

This is the first and most likely last time that I agree with you. Lets say that an AI robot is developed to use a gun or whatever to murder some person or persons that have been on someone's radar screen to do away with. These robots can be geared to do just about anything a person can do, but having the perfectly wired ability to murder a specific person or persons would be so much easier for a robot to do than for a human to do, and to do without consequence.

While I'll never be with you moonbat since you're a radical leftist, I am totally behind Sarah Connor. KILL the Robots!
 
Ross Dolan said:
I have a series of questions I’d like to ask, just to see how close to unanimity we can get from the various political, ethical, racial, cultural and gender factions here in the forum.

I recognize that no one may be interested in this as a topic...and also recognize that we may not even come close to unanimity. But for those willing to participate, let’s just see if there is any nearness that can be obtained.

The first question (what I consider an easy one, but let’s see) is:


If there is a job for which an efficient machine, robot or computer can be devised…on average, would the machine, robot, computer be more productive at that job than a human?
Click to expand...
There is no reason to use the machine for the job if it isn't cost effective which would mean is it more productive.
The answer is almost always yes, not just on average.

In order for the machine to be efficient, the work would most likely need to be repetitive, producing the same part repeatedly, or easily programmable in that the machine is producing parts that can be programmed in some fashion.

Where a machine currently would not be more productive is if complex decisions might need to be made in the middle of a job. We can program to overcome problems that we can anticipate might occur but it will be a while before we can expect a machine to think.

Interesting story I read today about how AI could start to deteriorate in its effectiveness as AI starts to use false AI produced results to train.
 
You must define productive....are we talking Western capitalism which means a pure economic based number or are we talking productive in the Chinese sense of in the best interest of the society? For instance here we think of self driving trucks would be a good thing because the job can be done cheaper, the Chinese would say that this should not be done if jobs need to be provided...humans must work to be healthy....there must be jobs.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
There is no reason to use the machine for the job if it isn't cost effective which would mean is it more productive.
The answer is almost always yes, not just on average.

In order for the machine to be efficient, the work would most likely need to be repetitive, producing the same part repeatedly, or easily programmable in that the machine is producing parts that can be programmed in some fashion.

Where a machine currently would not be more productive is if complex decisions might need to be made in the middle of a job. We can program to overcome problems that we can anticipate might occur but it will be a while before we can expect a machine to think.

Interesting story I read today about how AI could start to deteriorate in its effectiveness as AI starts to use false AI produced results to train.
Click to expand...
I was listening to an argument the other day that the Overlords want to maneuver AI into a position where the enslaved rely on it, to a point were we can no longer function without it. The Overlords control the tech, when they can take it away at any time and thus make people panic because they know they cant function without the tech then they will have complete control of the people.
 
Could people generally now remember 20-50 phone numbers like we used to?

I tend to doubt it....skills not used tend to evaporate.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
There is no reason to use the machine for the job if it isn't cost effective which would mean is it more productive.
The answer is almost always yes, not just on average.

In order for the machine to be efficient, the work would most likely need to be repetitive, producing the same part repeatedly, or easily programmable in that the machine is producing parts that can be programmed in some fashion.

Where a machine currently would not be more productive is if complex decisions might need to be made in the middle of a job. We can program to overcome problems that we can anticipate might occur but it will be a while before we can expect a machine to think.

Interesting story I read today about how AI could start to deteriorate in its effectiveness as AI starts to use false AI produced results to train.
Click to expand...
Good answer.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
You must define productive....are we talking Western capitalism which means a pure economic based number or are we talking productive in the Chinese sense of in the best interest of the society? For instance here we think of self driving trucks would be a good thing because the job can be done cheaper, the Chinese would say that this should not be done if jobs need to be provided...humans must work to be healthy....there must be jobs.
Click to expand...
The word I used was "productivity"...not productive.
 
The West loves its numbers, which for a long time have not generally meant what power has claimed that they have meant, and are now often straight up fraud. In the East they take a more holistic approach, work is measured very differently.
 
Libhater said:
In the West Bank the illegal Zionist occupiers have installed AI-controlled AUTONOMOUS camera-guns that shoot Palestinian civilians acting in a manner that the machine considers to be suspicious. They don't miss and no murders can be attributed to human error as no humans are involved- thus there are no prosecutions and justice is never served.
As the object of the exercise is to murder with impunity then yes, the machine is more ' productive ' than any human.

These machines - and the mindsets that produce such horrors - are made possible through financial gifts to genocidal Jews funded by taxing American workers.

I'm with Sarah Connor. Kill the robots.

th


90

This is the first and most likely last time that I agree with you. Lets say that an AI robot is developed to use a gun or whatever to murder some person or persons that have been on someone's radar screen to do away with. These robots can be geared to do just about anything a person can do, but having the perfectly wired ability to murder a specific person or persons would be so much easier for a robot to do than for a human to do, and to do without consequence.

While I'll never be with you moonbat since you're a radical leftist, I am totally behind Sarah Connor. KILL the Robots!
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
Ross Dolan said:
I have a series of questions I’d like to ask, just to see how close to unanimity we can get from the various political, ethical, racial, cultural and gender factions here in the forum.

I recognize that no one may be interested in this as a topic...and also recognize that we may not even come close to unanimity. But for those willing to participate, let’s just see if there is any nearness that can be obtained.

The first question (what I consider an easy one, but let’s see) is:


If there is a job for which an efficient machine, robot or computer can be devised…on average, would the machine, robot, computer be more productive at that job than a human?
Click to expand...
Yes
 
Ross Dolan said:
Could you give me a more definitive answer to:

If there is a job for which an efficient machine, robot or computer can be devised…on average, would the machine, robot, computer be more productive at that job than a human?
Click to expand...
Every single time. Just look at what CNC machines are fabricating.
 
Obtenebrator said:
Automation is fine insofar as it is more efficient. But if it results in people being unable to afford food and shelter there is no reason for automation. Even an inefficient system that helps more people will be preferable. UNLESS we establish some "minimum guaranteed income" for everyone in the country. Of course that will never fly with some folks.

Here's how it WILL go down here in the US:

We will develop technology to do pretty much everyone's job from manual labor to white-collar "knowledge work" and the corporations will roll it all out (long before it is actually good enough to do the job) and they will go through about 5-10 years of cycling back and forth getting rid of headcount and then re-hiring after the poorly implemented early phase systems screw up, back and forth for a couple years until the technology gets just good enough to be acceptable most of the time and then corporations will start the wholesale slaughter of their workforce. Leaving millions unemployed in what was once the richest nation on earth VERY QUICKLY showing up our current issue of massive wealth inequality and we will crater back into a crisis of unemployment and a twisted form of the Gilded Age only without sweatshops, just massive poverty.
Click to expand...
The offshoring of all manufacturing brought very cheap goods. I remember thinking that I was paying less for a pair of jeans than I did in the 70s. Short term benefit, but as years passed it was evident that the lower prices came at a cost.

More and more people found themselves in low paying jobs, without the ability to live what we deemed a 'normal middle class life'.
Two incomes were now necessary, and the family unit devolved.

The wealth gap widened, and continues to do so. The national mindset was 'increased profits at any cost'.

Whereas automation will be similar, there are plenty of jobs that machines will never do. The answer, of course, is to train people to go into service industries. Right now there aren't enough plumbers/electricians/auto mechanics.

Until/unless our corporate tax structure urges corporations to bring manufacturing back home, the problem will continue.

Of course, if it does happen, the price of goods will have to go up. American manufacturing isn't cheap, but taken in as a big picture, we pay more either way.
 
Ross Dolan said:
Could you give me a more definitive answer to:

If there is a job for which an efficient machine, robot or computer can be devised…on average, would the machine, robot, computer be more productive at that job than a human?
Click to expand...
Seems like a really odd question. Of course it would be and there are countless examples of such. From building cars to ordering food.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top