Venting

Well, I guess it is time that I vented a little.

First let me explain that I love technology and see great possibilities ahead of us, if said innovations are used/deployed correctly. However there is a darker side to all this. I also believe (and have tweeted to this effect) that AI will develop better using synthetic DNA as the DNA route is an already proven path (just look around you).

Technology is evolving/innovating far more rapidly than society can cope. I used the term evolving here as most modern technology is derived from earlier incarnations and tweaked for the next generation rather than each subsequent generation being a revolution it is more correct I believe to deem it an evolution. We’re seeing this with social and legal aspects as well as the inability of many to adapt to this ever changing world with an accelerating rate.

If we are going to allow AI to take hold we need to ensure that it does not see people as surplus to requirement.

From where we are today we have a path laid out ahead of us which enables technological automation of not only the much maligned tasks, but also those that less than 10 years ago we would have considered “safe” from such risk.

People need purpose regardless of gender or orientation, we have evolved to fill roles which nature has created and from there we now seek to carry out the same process with societal roles. This is not to say I am trying to tell people that women and men should only carry out gender assigned roles that is not the point of this vent. Jobs regardless of gender will be automated and that will mean no side wins. Gender pay gap becomes irrelevant when a role is automated, machine has no gender.

With the advent of self-driving vehicles we can see that this places in jeopardy the following: driving instructors, delivery drivers (drones most likely will take 99% of the work here), taxi drivers (even Uber and other such services would likely be affected here), Traffic Police (the car would be prevented from exceeding the speed limit, driving dangerously, no argument could be provided that it was “driving without due care and attention”, responsibility for ensuring the vehicle is roadworthy would be with the supplying company and I’m pretty sure that the software would be set to prevent a vehicle departing if it did not meet the prestart/journey checks. You can’t be done for using your phone/laptop/tablet within the vehicle as you’re no longer the driver or have control of any kind other than stating the destination. If a drunk gets in to a self-driving car I suppose you could still argue that they were “technically in charge of a vehicle under the influence” – however if all they are able to do is tell the vehicle to “take me home” would that be able to stick?), Truck drivers, Bus/Coach drivers. How many people would even own cars at that point against leasing them or renting them as and when required? If you don’t need a car for 80% of the time why would you bother to purchase/lease one when you can simply just call up a car for the time you need for a fixed fee? Repair shops (as the AI improves this should result in far fewer collisions/accidents). Who will be liable in the event of an accident? Will it be the company from whom you rented/leased the vehicle? The person wouldn’t be driving and if the vehicle is fully automated no argument can be made that they were in control of the vehicle. Would insurance be required by the person renting the vehicle or would that be included within the charge? Who would be responsible for road fund/tax? Who would have responsibility for ensuring that the vehicle had sufficient fuel/charge for the journey and would that be included within the rental as stated above for the insurance?

We can apply the same logic for many other things, including boats, planes and helicopters (eventually), possibly even food production (just as long as we’re not talking Soylent Green here – must remember to watch that again at some point). If your automated cooker burns the house down due to a fault in the system are you responsible for ensuring insurance? Are we looking at the old Software contracts here where there is no avenue to seek recompense from the supplier as you use the software/device at your own risk? Does this sit as product liability?

People now carry around phones with considerable computing power, most users would be able to cope with little more than a Chromium OS powered device for their daily needs (social media, email, web-browsing, media consumption). With the advent of faster Internet connections, increasingly bandwidth, reduced latency, more powerful servers and the push toward virtual desktop infrastructure provides a means for computing power on locally minimal platforms all at lower and lower costs. This could lead to Chromium like devices being used as front ends for the rented virtual machines – these could be integrated going forward directly in to monitors or TV screens. Many people already store their data using cloud services anyway. Given this scenario how many home PC/Laptops will be required? How many more generations before devices like a Raspberry PI fulfil these needs?

The world can’t suddenly move to a situation where we all become creatives, be that bloggers, writers, artists, film makers, Media/Youtube stars, sculptors and so on and so forth. Who would pay for the output of 7 billion creative types? With Cryptocurrencies many are hoping to move away from traditional banking and given the way Central banking has adversely affected the people like the giant vacuum cleaner it is (well that may not have enough pull – let’s call it a financial black hole).
Governments will continue to desire to tax the people; after all how else are they going to have something to spend? I just don’t see it as being possible as this future comes to pass and we are unable to break the dependence on currency, originally it worked as an exchange of value where people were unable to agree on something to barter with – something with an implicit agreed value that could be tendered for goods. It has been proposed that robots could be taxed; but at what level? The world feels like it needs to be rethought and a new path found which is more equitable and at the very least buys us enough time to adjust to a future which has yet to come clearly into view.

This is a period of change and we need to see whether this is just a new Industrial Revolution or something else?