Are humans and machine really in competition with each other though? The history of work — particularly since the Industrial Revolution — is the history of people outsourcing their labor to machines. While that began with rote, repetitive physical tasks like weaving, machines have evolved to the point where they can now do what we might think of as complex cognitive work, such as math equations, recognizing language and speech, and writing. Machines thus seem ready to replicate the work of our minds, and not just our bodies. In the 21st century, AI is evolving to be superior to humans in many tasks, which makes that we seem ready to outsource our intelligence to technology. With this latest trend, it seems like there’s nothing that can’t soon be automated, meaning that no job is safe from being offloaded to machines.
source: AI Should Augment Human Intelligence, Not Replace It (hbr.org)
It seems that your question is likely in reference to Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) applications, such as Chat GPT. When used to augment human abilities, AI accelerates the speed at which we are able to innovate. The key is that humans have to become very good at asking the right questions. Let's use the calculator as an example. Some people would have said that the invention of the calculator would replace the need for human mathematicians. What we saw instead is that mathematicians were able to perform far more complex calculations and do so much quicker. The key was that mathematicians needed to know how to use the calculators and what to ask it, and then piece together the information to align with their observations in the physical world. An AI is no different. Ultimately, it can't tell us what questions to ask it. That needs to be based on human observation.
For example, many people would say that curing cancer with AI would be an incredible use of the technology. I don't disagree. But why cancer? More people die from car accidents...should we focus on that issue first and ignore cancer? Most AIs would say yes. Why? Because they are designed to do the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of people. That would mean solving the biggest problems while entirely ignoring the others, considering them unworthy of computational power. But suppose that you have a family member who has cancer. You are almost certainly going to want computational power dedicated to finding a cure. The AI is not going to be able to determine which problems to solve or which questions to answer in a way that aligns with our physical observations in the "real world". AIs have no passions, interests, or physical experiences. It doesn't understand the things that humans find inconvenient. For example, getting into a cold vehicle is not a pleasant experience. We could use AI to develop a system that automatically turns the heat on in your car before it thinks you will leave your house. That would be a useful tool - but in light of life or death problems (cancer, car accidents, etc.), it seems futile. Thus, for a good many years, I believe AI will be dedicated to solving the largest problems that require significant computational power. For the foreseeable future, we are going to continue to need humans to guide and use AI in such a way that it is useful for society, so that it does not waste its computational power solving relatively futile problems.
Another important note is that any hours saved from AI will likely also be replaced by AI generated content. or example, if an employee saves four hours a week in work, that employee will probably also spend four hours a week sifting through the massive quantity of content developed by AI tools (such as Chat GPT). This may not be a one-to-one ratio. However, my point is that AI will lead to the production of data and information at a rate we have never seen before, and that will ultimately mean that individuals have more content to evaluate.
"Machines thus seem ready to replicate the work of our minds"
Not
Even
Close
Show me AI that:
-has intentionality
-understands deep language syntactic structures; generate bridging inferences
-whose actual (physical) hardware changes in response to experience and learning (i.e., plasticity)
-can choose to (or not to) perform the same action given the exact same external circumstances
-is capable of distinguishing that one of these is a request and the other a question: (Can you give me that?" vs. "Can you give me that?")
-Related to the previous point, when presented with a table and a pen - understanding the demonstrative 'that' refers to the 'pen' and not 'table' based on implicit learning/tacit knowledge
-Visually recognize objects that are partly occluded, fuzzy, or degraded
-Perceive words or comprehend sentences that are muffled, missing phonemes, vary in dialect or accent, etc,.
-Infer someone's internal state (mood) based on body language or tone
-Infer why someone performed a particular action or initiated a particular behavior without being explicitly told
-Distinguish between literal and figurative language (comprehend irony or sarcasm)
Dear Dr. Eduard Babulak
If you wish, you an also consult this other Question=
https://www.researchgate.net/post/And_if_in_addition_to_advancing_in_Artificial_Intelligence_we_further_investigate_our_Natural_Intelligence2#view=641ef2e37876036b0404c78f/14
Artificial Intelligence can never become the road of measurement to level of human intelligence . In this regards some years back I have expressed my views which I submit herewith for your kind information .
''With this our intelligent ,our memory ,our faith , zeal & the power of energy force become the lime light of our human brain , this forces work in the human brain & as such certain individual with the intelligence are Average -Above Average -& Below Average -Intelligence & last but not the least Genius .Brain & artificial intelligence should not be compared in the individual development of personality.
This is my personal opinion
The mind is torn by the contradictions between fantasy-desires and reality...
Therefore, the basis of natural (human) intelligence is "dark decisions"... (D-factor; "Freedom of Mind" - hidden insidious plans are carefully disguised)... Every action (or inaction) we take hurts someone... It almost always leads to psychosomatic disorders... Such is the nature of man and the highest creativity...
The human paradox (natural intelligence) is a deep mixture of (unfeasible) fantasy and reality, and an awareness of the inevitable harm to others from any action...
Without a wounding internal conflict, AGI cannot be created...
What are the metrics?
AGI should start building the "Pyramid of Cheops" ... and aggressively engage all available resources... (according to his belief... )...
PS: This topic is part of my book Intuition... and it's the core of my new book, The Holy Grail of AI (tentative title)...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Statistics
- Survey