I feel like this sub is full of people with unfulfilling, low-paying jobs menial jobs that want to not do those things anymore. They fail to see all of the hard work many in skilled professions have put in to learn the nuances of their job, they just see them as overpaid and privileged compared to themselves and the idea of a technology leveling the playing field fills them with joy. They also fail to see that even if their current job sucks, it is valued by society and its providing them a lifestyle that at a minimum, gives them regular access to the Internet (they are posting on here), thus also implying shelter and enough food to live, which is a far higher standard of living than a huge population of the world.

I'm not saying there aren't valid arguments to wealth inequality across professions, etc, but it seems extremely unlikely AI in the hands of a few corporations is going to help that.

i would just use gender neuteral terminology until/if they decide to gender themselves. not it,they them

this is the self driving car argument all over again. i suspect it will follow a similar trajectory

I am positive that an AI will do a better job of coming up with a useful curriculum than a non-augmented human could. Why? Because curriculums inherently have a lot of waste to them. It is impossible to design, let alone teach in accordance with, a curriculum that is suitable for a child that's slightly behind or some already knows the topic when you have to teach 20 of them. The result? Students increasingly falling behind with smarter or more experienced children

Like, there's a reason why language textbooks tend to be corny AF, like I'm taking a Differential Equations course designed by Sesame Street. Because both children and adults are the intended audience, and textbooks can't adjust their internal language to accommodate both.

>It's a tricky thing to argue for changes, though, since it takes a long time to determine the outcome of any experiments.

Not if the improvement is immediate and profound, and it will be. The AI doesn't even need to be super-advanced, though it will inevitably be. Just being able to personalize instruction for individual students would vastly improve the quality. And once we have 10-year old kids from poorer schools beating private-school non-AI-taught teenagers in math contests, I expect for AI to completely infiltrate education. If it hasn't already.

This sandwich tastes weird

>it's not really revolutionary

Just give it more time for fuck's sake. There is an AI that can tell the race of a patient from their X-Rays. No human knows how it does it.

Oh good, the rich won't need us at all.

My view has always been that the need for admiration will drive us to become a culture of artists and athletes. I mean, that's kind of what happens to rich people when they stop caring about money. They pick up hobbies and try to spend time with others. And really, how do people expect to get laid if they don't do something cool when they can. Though there will be people whose "something cool" will be competitive gaming or streaming or something, but a truly post-scarcity society will have much more opportunities to maintain fitness.

You would sue the company that owns the AI

So true because of the way many of us have confused transactional societal worth with our own personal individual self-worth.

Maybe a new emotional or spiritual Renaissance will happen, a re-connection with ourselves! I can see this happening, and I think there are some theories out there that point toward such societal growth, such as social development theory.

What separates work from purpose are whether a person chooses to accept it as their own choice.

AI is: More accurate More reliable Faster A lot cheaper And can do the jobs that doctors do but 24/7, providing the same accuracy every time. If a command is built into an algorithm, there is nothing that an AI will miss that humans will notice.

I mean you could simply grab a heap of exams the school district already gave and the standardized tests and just use that. Not saying this is an optimal standard but it's what we already use.

The fuck is it with this sub's gigantic hard-on for people losing their jobs?

The first thing that comes to your mind when reading this is "doctor obsolescence imminent" (which is weird bc I presume you don't have the slightest clue of what they do in general), and per usual, people on this sub's mouths being to water (because that's totally normal) when they see comments like this.

The collective population of this subreddit has got to be one of the absolute strangest IRL on this entire website.

That's the easy part, though. Coming up with that curriculum and determining what objective measurements count as "finished" is the hard part. You still need to tell the AI what it is that you want it to teach the children.

Yep. Plus in that 5 percent category the AI could be designed to inform the supervising doctor when it has low confidence so that when possible humans augment it.

Doctors commit grave errors now. They won't switch to AI until it is substantially better than humans .

Sue the doctor using AI. For essentially as far as we can imagine, a human doctor will still be on paper the one practicing medicine. They are just using AI as a tool to be more productive.

As the AI gets stronger and stronger the human does less and less, as the AI itself has a confidence level that with the right software algorithms can be extremely accurate. So the human doctor let's AI do it all for the cases where the AI is very confident.

Because many AIs will check anything done for you, this accidental amputation is unlikely, and most suits are going to fail because exact records of their AI reasoning and wha rit new are kept. So you can just see in the logs the AI did everything possible and picked the highest success probability treatment.

And rigged it where new doctors aren't trained in sufficient numbers, meaning that even bad doctors so long as they meet some low bar can continue practicing until age 70 or 80 or higher.

Same for humans. Tv shows like ER where they ask for a CBC and chem7 every time...

A personalized AI tutor and a curriculum with objective measurements, where once a student scores high enough they finish, would probably make teachers fairly unnecessary other than as a "hall monitor" to oversee groups of kids on their devices being taught by AI.

Or another way to put it, the mistake RATE is probably significantly lower for even relatively crude AI. Human doctors make a very large error rate, it may be 30 percent plus. Wrong diagnosis, suboptimal prescription, failure to consider relevant life threatening issues by overly focusing on the chief complaint.

(I define "error" by any medical treatment that is measurably less effective than the current gold standard, for all issues the patient has)

If known anti aging drugs work, human doctors commit essentially a 100 percent error rate by failing to prescribe them.

Current AI can fail in certain situations, so I think human doctors and other AI should be checking their work, but yeah, if you want to live get an AI doctor.

El Psy Kongroo.

Excluding a physician sitting in some India's remote area.

[removed]