Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Che]

On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 8:02 PM, a.ashfield  wrote:

> Che,
>
>
> The Durants do not judge one system better than anther but report what
> happened.
>

Oh, that would be utterly, completely untrue.

But we do get a lot of such claims of impartiality from those who support
the status quo -- few of them actually true.

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[a.ashfield]

Che,

On 10/23/2016 5:16 PM, Che wrote:
Will and Ariel Durant. lol. I outgrew that 'Readers' Digest' version 
of History shite, decades ago.


The Lessons of History is  an introduction and a survey of human history 
as a product of the human experience, of man’s essential evolutionary 
nature, taken from their eleven volume Story of Civilization.


The Durants do not judge one system better than anther but report what 
happened.  As they were both atheists I have little quarrel with their 
comments.


As you think this is Readers Digest "shite" I have no wish to continue 
this discussion with you, except to ask when are you leaving China or is 
that where you are?


AA

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Che]

On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 12:53 PM, a.ashfield  wrote:

> Che,
> You have outlined the problems and while you maybe right if the political
> system doesn't change, there are possible solutions.  As I wrote last year:
>
> "History shows that when wealth inequality reaches a certain point,
> unless it is redistributed there will be a revolution.  There are
> examples of both ways: Rome failed to redistribute and the Western Roman
> Empire collapsed.   Athens managed to redistribute wealth and survived
> for a while.  Will Durant’s book *The Lessons of History* gives many
> examples.   Durant also points out that following redistribution of
> wealth the government must allow its reaccumulation by the few to ensure
> future progress.  The failure of Communism in Russia showed what happens
> if you ignore human nature and don’t allow that.
>
>  One possible way of avoiding the looming conflict is conversion to a
> welfare system like the Scandinavian countries employ.  It does seem to
> be successful for them and surveys show they are considered the best places
> to live.  At least it might be a good transitional route.
>
> The other possibility is a guaranteed Universal Basic Income (UBI), high
> enough to live on, given to every adult citizen in the country with no
> strings attached.  Many object to the thought of giving money to the idle.
> Free marketers have to face the obvious, which is that the modern American
> economy doesn’t provide enough income distribution to preserve civility in
> our society.  Some say it is only sharing society’s accumulated wealth.  I
> will leave the moral justification to others.  The main objective is to
> avoid a revolution that would cost a lot more than UBI both in blood and
> treasure. "
>
> AA
>

Will and Ariel Durant. lol. I outgrew that 'Readers' Digest' version of
History shite, decades ago.

Property owners always want to avoid a revolution, eh? But they don't mind
massacring the wogs.

There's only one solution to this crisis, eh? Yours is the typical
avoidance mechanism: attempting to put off the inevitable. Wholly
diversionary and pie-in-the-sky (what we're invariably accused of, in
defence). In any case: capitalist AI *will* continue to cast off jobs,
lower the rate of profit -- and the Crisis of Capitalism *will* continue
unabated: until we either all die in a nuclear holocaust, or overthrow it
for Socialism.

There Is No (Third Way) Alternative.




>
>
>
>
> On 10/23/2016 11:54 AM, Che wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 2:47 PM, a.ashfield 
> wrote:
>
>> It could have been written more clearly with half the number of words.
>> They seem to think that displaced workers can be retrained for better
>> jobs, something that seems increasingly unlikely with current graduates
>> dead last in the world in math and science.
>>
>
> I'm sure Peter Gluck will get all apoplectic over this, but it needs
> pointing out that the apologists of the Capitalist order *lie*
> (contextually, anyway), when they talk about workers being 're-trained',
> after being replaced by automation. It is *well* understood -- and has been
> for over 150 years -- that automation is the *main* means whereby
> Capitalism replace Labor in the labor process. It is the *main* means by
> which labor costs are reduced (there are other, more immediate, cruder
> ways). This is, however, Capitalism's Achilles Heel: because Labor is in
> fact the *source* of profit ('Surplus-Value', technically. Another lie is
> that bourgeois 'Marginal Utility' theory, et al., is the real way profit is
> realized).
>
> When you automate people out of jobs, not only is there less money racing
> around in the economy (empty pockets), but what you have actually done is
> *increase the ratio of machine processes to Human processes in the
> production cycle* (the 'organic composition of capital'). This will
> actually cheapen the price of goods, because fewer inputs -- and less Human
> labor -- are involved in the production cycle (economies-of-scale are
> another aspect of this factor); however, since Labor *is* the source of
> Surplus-Value -- and there is less of it per unit in increasingly automated
> processes -- *the rate of profit per unit declines, as well*. This is an
> 'iron law' of capitalism which the capitalists will absolutely NEVER
> overcome -- their lies and beliefs and pious wishes notwithstanding.
>
> So our present teknologikal society really *is* heading into a dead-end
> under Capitalism. Thus WWIII (because of the pressing need of various
> cabals of capitalists being 'forced' to invade other groups' turf, in order
> to steal resources and markets, to make up for the decline in the rate of
> profit overall). Building out of the ruins of war also yields temporary
> profits... but this next war will likely have far fewer survivors than the
> last 3 (I consider the '7 Years' War' to be the actual first World war).
>
> If you're honest (intellectually or otherwise), you can see that this is a
> vicious ci

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:

I didn't make it clear enough in my earlier post what I meant about a small
> lethal drone.
>
I visualize something small enough to fly through a normal doorway or
> window, that is autonomous so that the control signal can't be jammed, that
> has good enough pattern recognition to spot humans - and kills everyone,
> civilian or soldier.
>

Yes, I described this kind of weapon in my book, on p. 101:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf

I compare them to a swarm of angry bees. Bees do not have much intelligence
but they can do great harm, and they appear to be somewhat organized when
they attack animals.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Che]

On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Peter Gluck  wrote:

> Che,
>
> DEspite your wish I will not become apoplectic.
> You have not understood what I say, re read my Kaltwasser doctrine.
>
> I have told the truth about Communism and have not been apologetic about
> Capitalism.
> BTW in my editorial of today you are cited.
>

You can't even distinguish stalinism from marxism. Not interested in your
opinion.

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[a.ashfield]

Che,
You have outlined the problems and while you maybe right if the 
political system doesn't change, there are possible solutions.  As I 
wrote last year:


"History shows that when wealth inequality reaches a certain point, 
unless it is redistributed there will be a revolution.There are examples 
of both ways: Rome failed to redistribute and the Western Roman Empire 
collapsed.Athens managed to redistribute wealth and survived for a 
while.Will Durant’s book /The Lessons of History/ gives many 
examples.Durant also points out that following redistribution of wealth 
the government must allow its reaccumulation by the few to ensure future 
progress.The failure of Communism in Russia showed what happens if you 
ignore human nature and don’t allow that.


One possible way of avoiding the looming conflict is conversion to a 
welfare system like the Scandinavian countries employ.It does seem to be 
successful for them and surveys show they are considered the best places 
to live.At least it might be a good transitional route.


The other possibility is a guaranteed Universal Basic Income (UBI), high 
enough to live on, given to every adult citizen in the country with no 
strings attached.Many object to the thought of giving money to the 
idle.Free marketers have to face the obvious, which is that the modern 
American economy doesn’t provide enough income distribution to preserve 
civility in our society.  Some say it is only sharing society’s 
accumulated wealth.I will leave the moral justification to others.The 
main objective is to avoid a revolution that would cost a lot more than 
UBI both in blood and treasure. "


AA





On 10/23/2016 11:54 AM, Che wrote:



On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 2:47 PM, a.ashfield > wrote:


It could have been written more clearly with half the number of words.
They seem to think that displaced workers can be retrained for
better jobs, something that seems increasingly unlikely with
current graduates dead last in the world in math and science.


I'm sure Peter Gluck will get all apoplectic over this, but it needs 
pointing out that the apologists of the Capitalist order *lie* 
(contextually, anyway), when they talk about workers being 
're-trained', after being replaced by automation. It is *well* 
understood -- and has been for over 150 years -- that automation is 
the *main* means whereby Capitalism replace Labor in the labor 
process. It is the *main* means by which labor costs are reduced 
(there are other, more immediate, cruder ways). This is, however, 
Capitalism's Achilles Heel: because Labor is in fact the *source* of 
profit ('Surplus-Value', technically. Another lie is that bourgeois 
'Marginal Utility' theory, et al., is the real way profit is realized).


When you automate people out of jobs, not only is there less money 
racing around in the economy (empty pockets), but what you have 
actually done is *increase the ratio of machine processes to Human 
processes in the production cycle* (the 'organic composition of 
capital'). This will actually cheapen the price of goods, because 
fewer inputs -- and less Human labor -- are involved in the production 
cycle (economies-of-scale are another aspect of this factor); however, 
since Labor *is* the source of Surplus-Value -- and there is less of 
it per unit in increasingly automated processes -- *the rate of profit 
per unit declines, as well*. This is an 'iron law' of capitalism which 
the capitalists will absolutely NEVER overcome -- their lies and 
beliefs and pious wishes notwithstanding.


So our present teknologikal society really *is* heading into a 
dead-end under Capitalism. Thus WWIII (because of the pressing need of 
various cabals of capitalists being 'forced' to invade other groups' 
turf, in order to steal resources and markets, to make up for the 
decline in the rate of profit overall). Building out of the ruins of 
war also yields temporary profits... but this next war will likely 
have far fewer survivors than the last 3 (I consider the '7 Years' 
War' to be the actual first World war).


If you're honest (intellectually or otherwise), you can see that this 
is a vicious circle with 'only one' ending -- assuming you have the 
usual ideological tunnel-vision.




In the section on LAWS - lethal autonomous weapons - they miss the
point that an unscrupulous enemy like ISIS could develop or modify
a Western development, to kill any human.  If they don't have to
worry about moral values.
I can imagine a small anomalous, lethal drone that could be made
in large numbers and once LENR becomes available have an
indefinite flight time.
At least they are thinking about it.

AA


Capitalism has no future -- other than death for all Humanity.






Frank Znidarsic wrote:


https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/whitehouse_files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/preparing_for_the_future_of_ai.pdf

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Peter Gluck]

Che,

DEspite your wish I will not become apoplectic.
You have not understood what I say, re read my Kaltwasser doctrine.

I have told the truth about Communism and have not been apologetic about
Capitalism.
BTW in my editorial of today you are cited.

My offer to your emigration in North Korea (help with documents) is still
valid.

peter

may I ask you to firsdt think and then speak? or...



On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Che  wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 2:47 PM, a.ashfield 
> wrote:
>
>> It could have been written more clearly with half the number of words.
>> They seem to think that displaced workers can be retrained for better
>> jobs, something that seems increasingly unlikely with current graduates
>> dead last in the world in math and science.
>>
>
> I'm sure Peter Gluck will get all apoplectic over this, but it needs
> pointing out that the apologists of the Capitalist order *lie*
> (contextually, anyway), when they talk about workers being 're-trained',
> after being replaced by automation. It is *well* understood -- and has been
> for over 150 years -- that automation is the *main* means whereby
> Capitalism replace Labor in the labor process. It is the *main* means by
> which labor costs are reduced (there are other, more immediate, cruder
> ways). This is, however, Capitalism's Achilles Heel: because Labor is in
> fact the *source* of profit ('Surplus-Value', technically. Another lie is
> that bourgeois 'Marginal Utility' theory, et al., is the real way profit is
> realized).
>
> When you automate people out of jobs, not only is there less money racing
> around in the economy (empty pockets), but what you have actually done is
> *increase the ratio of machine processes to Human processes in the
> production cycle* (the 'organic composition of capital'). This will
> actually cheapen the price of goods, because fewer inputs -- and less Human
> labor -- are involved in the production cycle (economies-of-scale are
> another aspect of this factor); however, since Labor *is* the source of
> Surplus-Value -- and there is less of it per unit in increasingly automated
> processes -- *the rate of profit per unit declines, as well*. This is an
> 'iron law' of capitalism which the capitalists will absolutely NEVER
> overcome -- their lies and beliefs and pious wishes notwithstanding.
>
> So our present teknologikal society really *is* heading into a dead-end
> under Capitalism. Thus WWIII (because of the pressing need of various
> cabals of capitalists being 'forced' to invade other groups' turf, in order
> to steal resources and markets, to make up for the decline in the rate of
> profit overall). Building out of the ruins of war also yields temporary
> profits... but this next war will likely have far fewer survivors than the
> last 3 (I consider the '7 Years' War' to be the actual first World war).
>
> If you're honest (intellectually or otherwise), you can see that this is a
> vicious circle with 'only one' ending -- assuming you have the usual
> ideological tunnel-vision.
>
>
>
>
>
>> In the section on LAWS - lethal autonomous weapons - they miss the point
>> that an unscrupulous enemy like ISIS could develop or modify a Western
>> development, to kill any human.  If they don't have to worry about moral
>> values.
>> I can imagine a small anomalous, lethal drone that could be made in large
>> numbers and once LENR becomes available have an indefinite flight time.
>> At least they are thinking about it.
>>
>> AA
>>
>
> Capitalism has no future -- other than death for all Humanity.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> Frank Znidarsic wrote:
>>
>> https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/whitehouse_
>> files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/preparing_for_the_future_of_ai.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[a.ashfield]

Jed,
Yes the report was quite well written but with a bit of thought it could 
have been much shorter.


I didn't make it clear enough in my earlier post what I meant about a 
small lethal drone.
I visualize something small enough to fly through a normal doorway or 
window, that is autonomous so that the control signal can't be jammed, 
that has good enough pattern recognition to spot humans - and kills 
everyone, civilian or soldier.  It would have a coded stop switch or 
"don't kill" switch that would be too difficult for the defender to 
figure out.   Or not have a kill switch if the owner is a fanatic and 
insane, as some appear to be.  This would not be so much of a problem 
until there is a battery replacement like LENR.


Consider what would happen if hundreds/thousands of these machines were 
loosed on a city by group like ISIS to clear out the "enemy" possibly 
with tiny more agile drones acting as scouts for the main body.  The 
point I was trying to make was that the report didn't seem to consider 
this possibility.  The US used nuclear bombs that didn't do much to 
protect the civilians and worries more about civilians when they are not 
fighting like in Syria.
Perhaps Ian Walker, who knows more about the state of the art, would 
comment.


AA

On 10/23/2016 10:48 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

a.ashfield mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net>> wrote:

In the section on LAWS - lethal autonomous weapons - they miss the
point that an unscrupulous enemy like ISIS could develop or modify
a Western development, to kill any human.


I have heard that it is not difficult to stop a commercially made 
flying drone. You interrupt the radio remote controls. The U.S. 
military has the ability to do this already. Apparently ISIS is 
already using these things.


Small, military grad drones made in Russia and autonomous drones might 
be more difficult to stop.


Here is a video of a drone firing a handgun. The drone was made by an 
18-year-old guy in Hartford, CT. Sort of like "A Connecticut Yankee in 
King Arthur's Court." A guy from Hartford causing chaos with 
futuristic weapons!


http://www.courant.com/breaking-news/hc-gun-fire-drone-investigation-20150721-story.html

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Che]

On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 2:47 PM, a.ashfield  wrote:

> It could have been written more clearly with half the number of words.
> They seem to think that displaced workers can be retrained for better
> jobs, something that seems increasingly unlikely with current graduates
> dead last in the world in math and science.
>

I'm sure Peter Gluck will get all apoplectic over this, but it needs
pointing out that the apologists of the Capitalist order *lie*
(contextually, anyway), when they talk about workers being 're-trained',
after being replaced by automation. It is *well* understood -- and has been
for over 150 years -- that automation is the *main* means whereby
Capitalism replace Labor in the labor process. It is the *main* means by
which labor costs are reduced (there are other, more immediate, cruder
ways). This is, however, Capitalism's Achilles Heel: because Labor is in
fact the *source* of profit ('Surplus-Value', technically. Another lie is
that bourgeois 'Marginal Utility' theory, et al., is the real way profit is
realized).

When you automate people out of jobs, not only is there less money racing
around in the economy (empty pockets), but what you have actually done is
*increase the ratio of machine processes to Human processes in the
production cycle* (the 'organic composition of capital'). This will
actually cheapen the price of goods, because fewer inputs -- and less Human
labor -- are involved in the production cycle (economies-of-scale are
another aspect of this factor); however, since Labor *is* the source of
Surplus-Value -- and there is less of it per unit in increasingly automated
processes -- *the rate of profit per unit declines, as well*. This is an
'iron law' of capitalism which the capitalists will absolutely NEVER
overcome -- their lies and beliefs and pious wishes notwithstanding.

So our present teknologikal society really *is* heading into a dead-end
under Capitalism. Thus WWIII (because of the pressing need of various
cabals of capitalists being 'forced' to invade other groups' turf, in order
to steal resources and markets, to make up for the decline in the rate of
profit overall). Building out of the ruins of war also yields temporary
profits... but this next war will likely have far fewer survivors than the
last 3 (I consider the '7 Years' War' to be the actual first World war).

If you're honest (intellectually or otherwise), you can see that this is a
vicious circle with 'only one' ending -- assuming you have the usual
ideological tunnel-vision.





> In the section on LAWS - lethal autonomous weapons - they miss the point
> that an unscrupulous enemy like ISIS could develop or modify a Western
> development, to kill any human.  If they don't have to worry about moral
> values.
> I can imagine a small anomalous, lethal drone that could be made in large
> numbers and once LENR becomes available have an indefinite flight time.
> At least they are thinking about it.
>
> AA
>

Capitalism has no future -- other than death for all Humanity.






>
>
> Frank Znidarsic wrote:
>
> https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/
> whitehouse_files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/preparing_for_the_future_of_ai.pdf
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:

In the section on LAWS - lethal autonomous weapons - they miss the point
> that an unscrupulous enemy like ISIS could develop or modify a Western
> development, to kill any human.
>

I have heard that it is not difficult to stop a commercially made flying
drone. You interrupt the radio remote controls. The U.S. military has the
ability to do this already. Apparently ISIS is already using these things.

Small, military grad drones made in Russia and autonomous drones might be
more difficult to stop.

Here is a video of a drone firing a handgun. The drone was made by an
18-year-old guy in Hartford, CT. Sort of like "A Connecticut Yankee in King
Arthur's Court." A guy from Hartford causing chaos with futuristic weapons!

http://www.courant.com/breaking-news/hc-gun-fire-drone-investigation-20150721-story.html

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Jed Rothwell]

Okay, I read the whole document. I think that for a government policy paper
it is well written and it makes good points.

It may be somewhat over-optimistic because it is written by experts. They
tend to have a gung-ho, can-do attitude. That's why they work in the field.
It is like asking me about cold fusion. I like the way they point to
previous delays and failures to meet goals, and on the other hand, they
point to faster than expected progress in self-driving cars and multi-level
deep learning.

The part on page 33 is amusing, especially this discussion of a
house-cleaning robot:

Scalable Oversight: How can we efficiently ensure that the cleaning robot
respects aspects of the objective that are too expensive to be frequently
evaluated during training? For instance, it should throw out things that
are unlikely to belong to anyone, but put aside things that might belong to
someone (it should handle stray candy wrappers differently from stray
cellphones). Asking the humans involved whether they lost anything can
serve as a check on this, but this check might have to be relatively
infrequent—can the robot find a way to do the right thing despite limited
information?

Safe Exploration: How do we ensure that the cleaning robot doesn’t make
exploratory moves with very bad repercussions? For example, the robot
should experiment with mopping strategies, but putting a wet mop in an
electrical outlet is a very bad idea.


It is like teaching a small child not to stick a fork into an electrical
outlet.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Frank Znidarsic]

Donald Trump was here in Western PA last week.  He promised to bring the jobs 
back.  Coal mining jobs and steel making jobs were to return.  People were to 
once again have lots of meaningful work and at a high pay.  America was to be 
great again!  The crowd of 6,000 cheered.


I read lights in the tunnel.  Jobs for who I thought.  The woman in back of me 
kicked my seat several times and shouted be happy.  I will be happy for all of 
the robots that get the jobs.


No word yet form the DOD on cold fusion.  They have my book.  Maybe it stumped 
them.


Frank Znidarsic

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Ian Walker]

Hi all

In reply to a.ashfield's point on Drones being used as weapons. Russia has
been using PKT armed (Medium machine gun about the same as an M240) Kamov
KA 137 drones since the 1990s.

The US analysts were shocked at the advanced capabilities Russia showed, eg
not their best stuff, in the Ukraine.
http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2016/09/us-army-racing-catch-russia-battle-drones/131936/

Iran is a prolific user of drones and if you remember captured the USA's
most advanced stealth drone several years ago. Hezbolah is known to be
field testing drones for Iran in Syria.

As to ISIS they already used an explosive armed Mini Drone based on an off
the shelf product in Iraq to kill two Kurdish Peshmurga and wound french
soldiers.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/10/11/isis-used-an-armed-drone-to-kill-two-kurdish-fighters-and-wound-french-troops-report-says/

NATO special forces in Iraq and Syria now carry an anti drone jammer gun as
standard issue. Problem is such devices are easily defeated, by the
simple expedient of locking on to the jammer signal and riding it to the
source. The US HARM Missile used to take out radar defences is an example.

Net guns don't have the range which limits their abilities. Static Nets
make you static so you loose mobility. You are then looking at
point defence systems like phalanx which can only really work on ships. Or
directed energy weapons again without LENR capabilities you are looking at
ships to carry the required power system

Here is a list publicly known Drone capabilities it doubles every year
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unmanned_aerial_vehicles
And it is dwarfed by the real ones you will not hear of.

I worked on advanced military simulations of drone capabilities a decade
back and wrote a report warning then that advanced capabilities in drones
would make all current assets from tanks and aircraft to the soldier in
field to the General and the Executive branch that control them obsolete.

The AI capable drones are the real killer app of drone warfare.

The White House report is just preparing the way for the end of the
military as it currently exists.

Kind Regards walker

On 22 October 2016 at 21:02, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> a.ashfield  wrote:
>
> It could have been written more clearly with half the number of words.
>> They seem to think that displaced workers can be retrained for better
>> jobs, something that seems increasingly unlikely with current graduates
>> dead last in the world in math and science.
>>
>
> U.S. college grads are first in math and science. Perhaps you mean high
> school graduates. That statistic is somewhat suspect because a higher
> fraction of the population graduates from highschool in the U.S. than from
> some other countries.
>
> The same problem confuses a discussion on the effects of funding on
> education. People have noted that New York and Massachusetts spend far more
> per capita on primary education than, say, Alabama or North Dakota even
> taking into account regional consumer cost differences. New York is the
> highest in the world, I think, at $19,818 per child. Yet SAT scores in
> North Dakota are higher than New York, 1799 versus 1463. This is taken as
> proof that spending money on education does not work.
>
> That argument falls apart when you look at the fraction of students taking
> the SAT test. 76% of kids in New York take the test, lowering the average
> score. Only 7% of the kids in Alabama take the SAT, and 2% in North Dakota.
> The top 2% of New York kids are far ahead of the 2% of kids in North Dakota
> who take the SAT. I believe the top 2% of kids from New York probably have
> the highest academic scores in the world. They are ahead of the average
> kids in Japan, and equal to the elite in Japan, in my opinion. I base that
> on my somewhat subjective experience in elite schools and universities in
> New York state and in Japan.
>
> See:
>
> https://ballotpedia.org/Public_education_in_New_York
>
> https://ballotpedia.org/Public_education_in_Alabama
>
> https://ballotpedia.org/Public_education_in_North_Dakota
>

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Alain Sepeda]

I've just relayed a news about inventors balance accros the wold.
US is the highest net importer of inventors, with a tiny export.
Germany is much below but high importer and exporter of inventors.
france unsurprisingly is net exporter, no importer of inventors.

as i see from recent Nobel and inventions and startups, US is net importer
of talents in nearly all domains, and exporter of ideas.

about IA, we should never forget two ideas.

one is that any machine will be exploited by a human, even quite
intelligent, and if it is nealy not controllable, the human :

> a.ashfield  wrote:
>
>
>> Yes I was referring to high school grads for that rating, but it really
>> doesn't matter.
>>
>
> You are right that it does not matter for the problem of AI replacing
> jobs. However, in a separate issue, you said that our current graduates are
> "dead last in the world in math and science." I do not think that is true.
> It is a statistical illusion caused by our high graduation rate. If every
> state and every country sent 76% of kids to college the way New York does,
> they would all be far behind the U.S. They send only a tiny elite instead.
> Which makes them look better.
>
> As it happens, they send most of their best people to U.S. universities.
> Fortunately for us, these people tend to stay in the U.S. The "brain drain"
> that began in the 1940s continues today, and the U.S. is the beneficiary. I
> used to work with graduating classes from Georgia Tech., and I saw that.
> Somehow, the U.S. has managed to capture the creme de la creme talent from
> every nation on earth. Whatever we are doing right, we should keep doing it.
>
> I am reminded of that by the recent crop of Japanese Nobel winners. Most
> of them either studied in the U.S., made the contribution that won the
> prize in the U.S., or they are now U.S. citizens. Shuji Nakamura, the guy
> who invented the blue LED, became an American citizen some time ago. He
> wrote a book about how angry he was with Japanese society and with the
> company he worked at. He is much happier in the U.S.
>
> So, we do not lack for engineering talent. However, as you say, that does
> not help the burgeoning employment crisis caused by AI. It probably makes
> it worse.
>
>
> It is not so much the college grads that will be losing their jobs
>> (although some like pharmacists etc will.) it is more that there won't be
>> other jobs to go to.
>>
>
> Yup. Big problem!
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> Yes I was referring to high school grads for that rating, but it really
> doesn't matter.
>

You are right that it does not matter for the problem of AI replacing jobs.
However, in a separate issue, you said that our current graduates are "dead
last in the world in math and science." I do not think that is true. It is
a statistical illusion caused by our high graduation rate. If every state
and every country sent 76% of kids to college the way New York does, they
would all be far behind the U.S. They send only a tiny elite instead. Which
makes them look better.

As it happens, they send most of their best people to U.S. universities.
Fortunately for us, these people tend to stay in the U.S. The "brain drain"
that began in the 1940s continues today, and the U.S. is the beneficiary. I
used to work with graduating classes from Georgia Tech., and I saw that.
Somehow, the U.S. has managed to capture the creme de la creme talent from
every nation on earth. Whatever we are doing right, we should keep doing it.

I am reminded of that by the recent crop of Japanese Nobel winners. Most of
them either studied in the U.S., made the contribution that won the prize
in the U.S., or they are now U.S. citizens. Shuji Nakamura, the guy who
invented the blue LED, became an American citizen some time ago. He wrote a
book about how angry he was with Japanese society and with the company he
worked at. He is much happier in the U.S.

So, we do not lack for engineering talent. However, as you say, that does
not help the burgeoning employment crisis caused by AI. It probably makes
it worse.


It is not so much the college grads that will be losing their jobs
> (although some like pharmacists etc will.) it is more that there won't be
> other jobs to go to.
>

Yup. Big problem!

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[a.ashfield]

Jed,
Yes I was referring to high school grads for that rating, but it really 
doesn't matter.  It is not so much the college grads that will be losing 
their jobs (although some like pharmacists etc will.) it is more that 
there won't be other jobs to go to.


For a more pessimistic look see below.  Also a very funny summary about 
the presidential candidates.

http://fredoneverything.org/ready-ronald-mcdonald-or-lucretia-borgia-in-the-long-run-we-are-all-dead/

AA

On 10/22/2016 4:02 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

a.ashfield mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net>> wrote:

It could have been written more clearly with half the number of words.
They seem to think that displaced workers can be retrained for
better jobs, something that seems increasingly unlikely with
current graduates dead last in the world in math and science.


U.S. college grads are first in math and science. Perhaps you mean 
high school graduates. That statistic is somewhat suspect because a 
higher fraction of the population graduates from highschool in the 
U.S. than from some other countries.


The same problem confuses a discussion on the effects of funding on 
education. People have noted that New York and Massachusetts spend far 
more per capita on primary education than, say, Alabama or North 
Dakota even taking into account regional consumer cost differences. 
New York is the highest in the world, I think, at $19,818 per child. 
Yet SAT scores in North Dakota are higher than New York, 1799 versus 
1463. This is taken as proof that spending money on education does not 
work.


That argument falls apart when you look at the fraction of students 
taking the SAT test. 76% of kids in New York take the test, lowering 
the average score. Only 7% of the kids in Alabama take the SAT, and 2% 
in North Dakota. The top 2% of New York kids are far ahead of the 2% 
of kids in North Dakota who take the SAT. I believe the top 2% of kids 
from New York probably have the highest academic scores in the world. 
They are ahead of the average kids in Japan, and equal to the elite in 
Japan, in my opinion. I base that on my somewhat subjective experience 
in elite schools and universities in New York state and in Japan.


See:

https://ballotpedia.org/Public_education_in_New_York

https://ballotpedia.org/Public_education_in_Alabama

https://ballotpedia.org/Public_education_in_North_Dakota

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:

It could have been written more clearly with half the number of words.
> They seem to think that displaced workers can be retrained for better
> jobs, something that seems increasingly unlikely with current graduates
> dead last in the world in math and science.
>

U.S. college grads are first in math and science. Perhaps you mean high
school graduates. That statistic is somewhat suspect because a higher
fraction of the population graduates from highschool in the U.S. than from
some other countries.

The same problem confuses a discussion on the effects of funding on
education. People have noted that New York and Massachusetts spend far more
per capita on primary education than, say, Alabama or North Dakota even
taking into account regional consumer cost differences. New York is the
highest in the world, I think, at $19,818 per child. Yet SAT scores in
North Dakota are higher than New York, 1799 versus 1463. This is taken as
proof that spending money on education does not work.

That argument falls apart when you look at the fraction of students taking
the SAT test. 76% of kids in New York take the test, lowering the average
score. Only 7% of the kids in Alabama take the SAT, and 2% in North Dakota.
The top 2% of New York kids are far ahead of the 2% of kids in North Dakota
who take the SAT. I believe the top 2% of kids from New York probably have
the highest academic scores in the world. They are ahead of the average
kids in Japan, and equal to the elite in Japan, in my opinion. I base that
on my somewhat subjective experience in elite schools and universities in
New York state and in Japan.

See:

https://ballotpedia.org/Public_education_in_New_York

https://ballotpedia.org/Public_education_in_Alabama

https://ballotpedia.org/Public_education_in_North_Dakota

Re: [Vo]:White house report on AI

[a.ashfield]

It could have been written more clearly with half the number of words.
They seem to think that displaced workers can be retrained for better 
jobs, something that seems increasingly unlikely with current graduates 
dead last in the world in math and science.
In the section on LAWS - lethal autonomous weapons - they miss the point 
that an unscrupulous enemy like ISIS could develop or modify a Western 
development, to kill any human.  If they don't have to worry about moral 
values.
I can imagine a small anomalous, lethal drone that could be made in 
large numbers and once LENR becomes available have an indefinite flight 
time.

At least they are thinking about it.

AA


Frank Znidarsic wrote:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/whitehouse_files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/preparing_for_the_future_of_ai.pdf 

[Vo]:White house report on AI

[Frank Znidarsic]

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/whitehouse_files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/preparing_for_the_future_of_ai.pdf