[p2p-research] Tick, tock, tick, tock… BING

[Paul D. Fernhout]

> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Paul D. Fernhout <
> pdfernhout at kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:
>> Ryan wrote:
>>> Human level computational intelligence.
>>> [snip: from http://www.vetta.org/2009/12/tick-tock-tick-tock-bing/ ]
>>>
>>> Right, so my prediction for the last 10 years has been for roughly
>>> human level AGI in the year 2025 (though I also predict that sceptics
>>> will deny that it’s happened when it does!) This year I’ve tried to
>>> come up with something a bit more precise. In doing so what I’ve found
>>> is that while my mode is about 2025, my expected value is actually a
>>> bit higher at 2028. This is not because I’ve become more pessimistic
>>> during the year, rather it’s because this time I’ve tried to quantify
>>> my beliefs more systematically and found that the probability I assign
>>> between 2030 and 2040 drags the expectation up. Perhaps more useful is
>>> my 90% credibility region, which from my current belief distribution
>>> comes out at 2018 to 2036.
>>>
>> With all the focus on the "singularity" (AI bootstrapping itself to
>> superhuman capabilities, which can be questioned) it seems people easily
>> miss the simple idea that if robots and AI are just close to human
>> capabilities, they can replace most human workers, especially as many tasks
>> can be re-engineered to be less demanding of some skills. That would be the
>> end of economics as we know it, since there would be no way for most humans
>> to sell their labor in the market. I'd suggest it is happening even now.
>>
>> The tragedy in all this is that the trends are obvious between AI,
>> robotics, and 3D printing (and social networking and free software and other
>> things) that mainstream economics based around scarcity-management and the
>> sale of human labor is ending in, at the latest, a couple of decades, but
>> governments are not taking any steps to deal with this in a coherent and
>> positive way. (Like embrace it.) From: :-)
>>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobless_recovery
>> """
>> While this may seem to be purely a technical argument about whether such
>> devices can exist or how soon we will have them (or even, questioning just
>> what we can do with the computers and robots and flexible manufacturing
>> devices we have even now), the consequences in terms of planning social
>> policy and related economic issues are profound. For example, what do fifty
>> year projections for, say, the US Social Security trust fund mean if the
>> entire monetary economy as we know it may not exist in two decades? What
>> would health care costs be in 2029 if we could mass-produce robotic doctors,
>> robotic ambulances, and even robotic nursebots (like Sebastian Thrun has
>> worked towards)? Or what would costs be if people could print out most
>> medical devices (or even most drugs) at home on demand using nanotech-based
>> 3D printers? Likewise, two decades is about how long it would take a child
>> born in 2009 to enter the work force after college in 2030 -- what type of
>> jobs or culture should such children be preparing for if 3D printing
>> replaces much manufacturing, and if robotics/AI and a freely produced
>> commons replaces most services? What would the economy be like in even just
>> ten years if society decided much of the work done globally now is mainly
>> about guarding or is make-work based on scarcity assumptions that are
>> out-of-date just in relation to technology we have today (especially given
>> movements towards voluntary simplicity or environmentalism)? If we were to
>> embrace the prospect of a gift economy and global abundance through 3D
>> printing, improved robotics, better design, better materials, and so on,
>> then our societal spending patterns might shift greatly, even now, in terms
>> of less worries about long-term deficit spending to create millions of R&D
>> jobs today developing advanced technology under free and open source
>> licenses. In that sense, a gift economy may be an example of a
>> self-fulfilling prophecy.
>> """
 > Ryan Lanham wrote:
 > I'm told printing flesh is increasingly possible...there are prototypes.
 > Instead of ink, we may soon have amino acids and proteins in jars attached
 > to printers.
 >
 > The times they are a-changin'.
 >
 > I have been a skeptic on the rapid AGI/robotics stuff until this year when
 > the trend lines clearly show major change.  MIT launched a 20 person
 > (faculty) AI/robotics program this week to re-found AI. I hear money is
 > starting to flow as people smell the prospects.

Today I thought of a parallel to global climate change politics, even as I 
think the evidence for the end of economics is enromously greater than for 
global climate change. :-) What I mean by that is that while we can see some 
trends for global climate change (with some noise, too), we don't fully know 
what to make of them (there is uncertainty in the effects). Also, we can 
fairly easily deal with them by some technology changes (a switch to 
renewables, or building seasteads) without much of a cultural change as far 
as fundamental capitalist values (it's just arguing about who should pay how 
much for remediation or pollution). The end of economics seems much clearer 
in many ways and much sooner than any global warming issues talked about 
happening by the end of this century.

But here is one parallel, after decades of warnings:
http://www.ecofactory.com/news/top-nasa-climate-scientist-copenhagen-must-fail-120309
"""
James Hansen, one of the world's most prominent climate scientists, 
announced that he would boycott of the COP15 summit in Copenhagen. As one of 
the first pioneers to bring global warming to the political arena with his 
1988 Congressional testimony, Hansen also used this week's announcement to 
criticize world leaders who have politicized climate change since its 
acceptance into mainstream policy decisions. "We don't have a leader who is 
able to grasp it and say what is really needed. Instead we are trying to 
continue business as usual," said Hansen. The NASA scientist has been quoted 
to call cap and trade "no more appropriate to fight climate change than a V2 
rocket was to get to the moon." He has also been deeply critical of the 
policies of the Obama administration in general, calling Obama's efforts 
"half-assed" in a recent interview with The Guardian. ...
   Hansen has been especially critical of those who would manipulate the 
public into believing that meaningful work was being done to protect the 
environment. His chief targets have politicians like Barack Obama, John 
Kerry, and Al Gore who widely promote cap and trade. "Governments going to 
Copenhagen claim to have goals for 2050, which they will achieve with the 
'cap-and-trade' mechanism. They are lying through their teeth," said Hansen.
"""

The CO2 taxes he outlines, mentioned here:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/12/hansen-vs-krugman.html
could fund a basic income for all (as I've suggested before), catching two 
birds with one net. :-)

Still, if the governments of the world took decades to come to putting in 
place defective half-measures for that, would they be expected any time soon 
  to deal with the end of economics as we know it in two decades or so? :-)

"Key dates in unfolding story of warming planet"
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gVe4V7wp5Mug0poO0-n5S3hz4GxgD9CED3IO1

Actually, it is hard to say. Again, global climate change is dispersed, 
slow, non-obvious, bounces back and forth (some places cool, some warm), and 
so on. But the end of economics via 3D printing, robotics, and AI seems to 
be coming on more like a slow motion Hurricaine Katrina.

Oops, I guess the USA did not do much about that either. Even afterwards. :-(

Still, I can hope that the mix of warning and timescale might lead some 
governments to act well on these changes.

But in any case, even if governments are followers, not leaders, one can 
make other plans about dealing with these trends as individuals and 
communities and smaller organizations.

Robotics has had investments now and then, but some of this is faddish, and 
some relates to social dynamics. (There was an "AI Winter" just starting as 
I graduated from college, another aspect of my career path.)

I feel that more and more the *visual* evidence about robotics is more and 
more indisputable as you look at youtube videos.
"[p2p-research] Robot videos and P2P implications (was Re: A thirty year 
future...)"
http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/2009-November/005926.html

--Paul Fernhout
http://www.pdfernhout.net/