News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Should economists be more concerned about AI?. Parent comment

Re:Should economists be more concerned about AI? by oh_sigh on Wednesday March 01, 2017 @08:38PM (#13770643)
The computer itself has been a mind multiplier since the beginning. So I don't think it's fair to say that this is something completely new.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Should economists be more concerned about AI? by ThomPete on Wednesday March 01, 2017 @08:42PM (#13770661)
The new thing is that computers can learn to learn.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Should economists be more concerned about AI? by q3r3qr3q on Wednesday March 01, 2017 @08:51PM (#13770708)
You mean the machine learning stuff, that's been around since 1959?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Should economists be more concerned about AI? by taneq on Wednesday March 01, 2017 @11:18PM (#13771377)
That machine learning stuff which has been around for the past 60 years out of humanity's, what, 10,000 years of 'modern' humans (starting with the invention of agriculture)? That's only really reached parity with humans on a broad range of cognitive tasks in the past within the last 5-10 years?

Yes, that stuff.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Should economists be more concerned about AI? by mamp on Wednesday March 01, 2017 @10:53PM (#13771270)
In theory, but we didn't have enough data or computing power for machines to compete with human performance (also algorithmic improvements).

I feel that the disruption isn't going to be completely new compared to past changes but probably across more industries at the same time because machines can soon move and think e.g. Driving, diagnosis, planning (through better prediction), assembly.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Should economists be more concerned about AI? by gpawl on Wednesday March 01, 2017 @09:49PM (#13771007)
and now is finally energy efficient enough for practical usage.
[ Parent | on HN ]