Philosophy Now Forum

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

bobevenson wrote: Please, there will always be jobs, don't talk like the village idiot. Also, if money is not backed by actual merchandise, it's monopoly money worth absolutely nothing. You would do yourself a favor by staying away from the subject of economics altogether.

All jobs can be done by machines .
..
PhilX

False. `So obviously and patently false.

Give a counterexample.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
All jobs can be done by machines .
..
PhilX

False. `So obviously and patently false.

Give a counterexample.

PhilX

Hair dressing; Writing literature; Counselling; Lawyers and judges; deciding what jobs really need doing; writing music worth listening to; performing; child care.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
False. `So obviously and patently false.

Give a counterexample.

PhilX

Hair dressing; Writing literature; Counselling; Lawyers and judges; deciding what jobs really need doing; writing music worth listening to; performing; child care.

Every example you listed can be done by machine. In fact articles have been written specifically on all of these examples which falls under robotics and AI. So you don't know what you're talking about. Better go back to sculpting in your studio.

PhilX

Hobbes' Choice wrote: Hair dressing; Writing literature; Counselling; Lawyers and judges; deciding what jobs really need doing; writing music worth listening to; performing; child care.

Writing literature and Composing Music are 2 areas that I would question the ability if machines to do well. Certainly a computer could write 4'33", an extremely simple program would do, but when you add the qualifier of being worth listening to, it is eliminated. It would be interesting to have works of literature produced by people and computers, and have a blind critical analysis done of them.

thedoc wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote: Hair dressing; Writing literature; Counselling; Lawyers and judges; deciding what jobs really need doing; writing music worth listening to; performing; child care.

Writing literature and Composing Music are 2 areas that I would question the ability if machines to do well. Certainly a computer could write 4'33", an extremely simple program would do, but when you add the qualifier of being worth listening to, it is eliminated. It would be interesting to have works of literature produced by people and computers, and have a blind critical analysis done of them.

Doc, every example Hobbes listed I've seen articles listed specifically for so it wouldn't surprise me that he read those articles and twisted it in his mind towards the negative. I'll do a search for the music and literature fields and will turn up positive articles.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Give a counterexample.

PhilX

Hair dressing; Writing literature; Counselling; Lawyers and judges; deciding what jobs really need doing; writing music worth listening to; performing; child care.

Every example you listed can be done by machine.
PhilX

Prove it!

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Hair dressing; Writing literature; Counselling; Lawyers and judges; deciding what jobs really need doing; writing music worth listening to; performing; child care.

Every example you listed can be done by machine.
PhilX

Prove it!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washin ... F0p19G%3De

I'm not through with my search and keep in mind whatever stage the field is at will only get better.

Here's another article:

http://qz.com/495614/computers-can-now- ... d-picasso/

Let me add that my typing program, SwiftKey, has recently had AI added to it and it anticipates what I'm about to type, up to two words ahead (even in cases when it shouldn't). A big improvement and this is only the beginning.

PhilX

thedoc wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote: Hair dressing; Writing literature; Counselling; Lawyers and judges; deciding what jobs really need doing; writing music worth listening to; performing; child care.

Writing literature and Composing Music are 2 areas that I would question the ability if machines to do well. Certainly a computer could write 4'33", an extremely simple program would do, but when you add the qualifier of being worth listening to, it is eliminated. It would be interesting to have works of literature produced by people and computers, and have a blind critical analysis done of them.

Performing is also a human skill. Imagine a machine trying to be Mick Jagger, Bob Dylan or even A rap star. Additionally no machine could ever write an artistic, meaningful lyric.
A machine has no context to produce literature. It might be programmed to produce doggerel, but that would involve a programmer that IS human ultimately.
Machines might be able to do the donkey work, they can more quickly calculate PI to the nth degree, but no machine could ever understand why it was doing it, nor what it was for.
As usual PhilX has spewed his usual unimaginative exaggeration.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Every example you listed can be done by machine.
PhilX

Prove it!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washin ... F0p19G%3De

I'm not through with my search and keep in mind whatever stage the field is at will only get better.

PhilX

Bullshit for morons, totally reliant on a human programmer who understands music.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Every example you listed can be done by machine.
PhilX

Prove it!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washin ... F0p19G%3De

I'm not through with my search and keep in mind whatever stage the field is at will only get better.

PhilX

The only fly in the ointment is that the programs are written by humans, so all the results can, so far, be traced back to human input. A truly computer created work will happen when AI is finally developed and is independent of human input for it's creative efforts.

thedoc wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Prove it!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washin ... F0p19G%3De

I'm not through with my search and keep in mind whatever stage the field is at will only get better.

PhilX

The only fly in the ointment is that the programs are written by humans, so all the results can, so far, be traced back to human input. A truly computer created work will happen when AI is finally developed and is independent of human input for it's creative efforts.

You haven't kept up with the news doc. AI has the ability to improve itself continuously (that's in my SwiftKey program). So what if humans got it started. AI will take over.

PhilX

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

thedoc wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote: Hair dressing; Writing literature; Counselling; Lawyers and judges; deciding what jobs really need doing; writing music worth listening to; performing; child care.

Writing literature and Composing Music are 2 areas that I would question the ability if machines to do well. Certainly a computer could write 4'33", an extremely simple program would do, but when you add the qualifier of being worth listening to, it is eliminated. It would be interesting to have works of literature produced by people and computers, and have a blind critical analysis done of them.

Performing is also a human skill. Imagine a machine trying to be Mick Jagger, Bob Dylan or even A rap star. Additionally no machine could ever write an artistic, meaningful lyric.
A machine has no context to produce literature. It might be programmed to produce doggerel, but that would involve a programmer that IS human ultimately.
Machines might be able to do the donkey work, they can more quickly calculate PI to the nth degree, but no machine could ever understand why it was doing it, nor what it was for.
As usual PhilX has spewed his usual unimaginative exaggeration.

You don't know what you're talking about. As I just said, it doesn't matter if humans got it started as the machines will pick up the ball. Robotics is in its early infancy as videos from Boston Dynamics will demonstrate. Then there are other areas where machines are more advanced such as those that have beaten chess and Go champions, e.g. In fact a machine can do better sculpting than you ever can.

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

thedoc wrote:
Writing literature and Composing Music are 2 areas that I would question the ability if machines to do well. Certainly a computer could write 4'33", an extremely simple program would do, but when you add the qualifier of being worth listening to, it is eliminated. It would be interesting to have works of literature produced by people and computers, and have a blind critical analysis done of them.

Performing is also a human skill. Imagine a machine trying to be Mick Jagger, Bob Dylan or even A rap star. Additionally no machine could ever write an artistic, meaningful lyric.
A machine has no context to produce literature. It might be programmed to produce doggerel, but that would involve a programmer that IS human ultimately.
Machines might be able to do the donkey work, they can more quickly calculate PI to the nth degree, but no machine could ever understand why it was doing it, nor what it was for.
As usual PhilX has spewed his usual unimaginative exaggeration.

You don't know what you're talking about. As I just said, it doesn't matter if humans got it started as the machines will pick up the ball. Robotics is in its early infancy as videos from Boston Dynamics will demonstrate. Then there are other areas where machines are more advanced such as those that have beaten chess and Go champions, e.g. In fact a machine can do better sculpting than you ever can.

PhilX

Hair dressing; Writing literature; Counselling; Lawyers and judges; deciding what jobs really need doing; writing music worth listening to; performing; child care.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Performing is also a human skill. Imagine a machine trying to be Mick Jagger, Bob Dylan or even A rap star. Additionally no machine could ever write an artistic, meaningful lyric.
A machine has no context to produce literature. It might be programmed to produce doggerel, but that would involve a programmer that IS human ultimately.
Machines might be able to do the donkey work, they can more quickly calculate PI to the nth degree, but no machine could ever understand why it was doing it, nor what it was for.
As usual PhilX has spewed his usual unimaginative exaggeration.

You don't know what you're talking about. As I just said, it doesn't matter if humans got it started as the machines will pick up the ball. Robotics is in its early infancy as videos from Boston Dynamics will demonstrate. Then there are other areas where machines are more advanced such as those that have beaten chess and Go champions, e.g. In fact a machine can do better sculpting than you ever can.

PhilX

Hair dressing; Writing literature; Counselling; Lawyers and judges; deciding what jobs really need doing; writing music worth listening to; performing; child care.

You're stuck in a loop parroting yourself.

PhilX