Getting efficient in some ways will also highlight regulatory efficiencies. If a McMansion could be designed for $5k with AI, built for $25k with 3D printing, it'll still cost $750k to buy a plot of dirt in the central city that you're not allowed to put apartments on.
In California it costs ~$100k just for design approval, permits, etc. BEFORE you build a house. That 'industry' is going to fight tooth & nail against disintermediation and other threats like building a house for $25k that was designed by an AI.
This article immediately raises a few question areas in my mind:
1) How do we handle the 'waste' products from such rapid growth? What will they be? How will they be recycled or remediated? Microplastics are already causing concerns. What other unintended consequences will surface that may throttle this view of explosive growth?
2) People are not going to be good at adapting to rapid change. On the one hand we have a long childhood to develop and learn. On the other hand, extremely rapid growth in not only technology, goods, and services suggest that what we painfully learned last year will be superseded by what's new this year. A likely result is not learning basic life sustaining skills, disconnection from the systems that support life like agriculture and animal husbandry, let along the technical and blue collar skills that help us avoid total dependency upon others who now may be robots.
3) Then there is culture - how will different cultures choose to adapt to such rapid changes? I suggest that humanity may be best served by recognizing that several avenues of evolution are prudent to pursue for survival in some form. Here are some thoughts from a commentary I wrote in 2007 in response to an article on IVF regulation.
A speculation that I have related to the forces shaping the future of mankind.
"My early thinking that has evolved this speculation started with Jacob Bronowski's "The Ascent of Man" that I read many decades ago. The one key idea that his work left with me is that mankind has survived and thrived based upon his fecundity and willingness to explore the boundaries of his environments, whether they be of the mind, the spirit or the physical. Man is by nature an excellent toolmaker and the creations developed from his tools are what set us apart from the other creatures in our world. All of the global trends towards the acceleration of change, technology and information sharing tend to support this view of the nature of man. One consequence is that man will continue to shape his environment and consequently his own physical and mental persona. This is not an if. It is more of a how and when.
Therefore, I speculate that given the acceleration of change and opportunity as shared by Ray Kurzweil in "The Singularity is Near" and his other writings / books - that in this century it is quite possible that mankind begins to redefine the definition of man as represented by his progeny. Here are the five paths that I think are reasonable future evolutions of ourselves.
1. The natural man - mainly supported by religious groups who see God as the architect of nature and prefer that man not tinker with his nature. Only what nature has evolved via processes it has used over the millions of years of evolution are trusted enough to define man's evolution.
2. The genetically improved man - here the toolmaker works on first fixing the perceived defects of our genetic heritage. The good is that clearly harmful genetic heritage may be corrected in subsequent generations. The risk is that our lack of full understanding removes a level of robustness in our genetic history that makes us less capable of dealing with relatively rare threats, diseases, climate/environment change, etc. Hopefully, the good exceeds the risk. Here your work in regulating how we manage progress is challenged with balancing clear needs with real risks. Hence the need for posts like yours discussing the need for IVF regulation that results in transparency in the actions of those responsible for helping advance this general area of science.
3. The bio-electro-mechanically improved man - as we see brain implants for the control of computers, surgery to enhance eyesight, smart prosthetics, exoskeletons for greater load carrying (military and handicapped applications) and, not so romantic or desirable, the Borg of Star Trek, it is clear that the need from some to recover the normal capabilities of a person will extend into how much better can I be? As the complex needs of an ever more advanced society expand, specialized tasks require specialized tools that extend our capabilities. Only the imagination bounds the possibilities of how far this will extend. It is truly the grist of science fiction.
4.. Virtual man becomes our alter ego as virtual worlds become more practical and perhaps necessary for entertainment, socialization, training (via simulations), education and remote collaboration environments. How this part of our nature evolves depends, in part, upon the relative carbon costs of doing things in the real world as opposed to doing the equivalent in virtual spaces. It also seems to be driven by the relative real cost reduction of accomplishing the same objective by doing at least some of it in the virtual space.
5. Artificial man as represented by the continuing improvements in robotics and artificial intelligence. This seems perhaps a stretch and many are skeptical about truly sentient AI entities. I do not believe that man is so unique that his nature cannot be emulated and improved upon. Only time will tell us for sure. I will place my bet on this century being the breakthrough one for AIs as well.
These five paths are what I think our destiny offers. The paths are complex, the rules of engagement are yet to be defined and they will evolve with our progress. I trust that those, like you, who try to guide our evolution, balancing the risks and rewards, will keep your sights on the potential of our species, as it ascends in capabilities, and allow our tool-making nature enough freedom to evolve ourselves to survive beyond the realm of our planet. That day will come when our children will grow beyond the confines of our current home. They will need new tools, new capabilities and new "partners" to thrive in the harsher realms of our universe."
Generally it’s a good idea to throw out the wilder numbers when analyzing speculation. That thirty per cent growth number is ridiculous, as is the forty years to see automation everywhere. And nothing is mentioned regarding how the wealth and productivity gains will be distributed. A Star Trek economy where we no longer use money? We are going to have to advance socially far beyond today before we deal with the inequities that growth like that would cause. Fun to speculate but futurism is far from a science.
Eventually everything will be free, once AI's and their robot workers take over, if you believe in the future as written by SF author Iain M. Banks (passed), who presupposed a post-scarcity reality called the The Culture in 10 novels, which is ruled by sentient "Minds". Resources and energy are unlimited in this future and therefore money or power mean nothing. Warfare is mostly abolished and what does occur is between lesser races and The Culture machines. People live in huge spaceships always on the move between stars, capable of carrying billions, or on planets/moons, or in artificial orbital's, etc. This is a hedonistic universe where you can acquire, do or be almost anything you want (even change sexes and give birth). The Minds take care of all the details and people do what makes themselves happy. Mostly, the Minds don't get involved in petty BS among humans.
OTOH, another SF author named Neal Asher, created a universe is called the Polity that is also ruled by sentient machines. In this universe, the machines took over when we humans created yet another war among ourselves but the machines that were supposed to fight refused and instead took over all government and military functions. There is a big honkin AI in charge of everything and a lot of minor AI's that help do its bidding across the patch of the universe that it controls. There are no politicians (surely a good thing!). But AI's in this universe can go rogue (e.g. AI war machine Penny Royal) and create all sorts of mayhem, death and destruction. The Polity is far rawer than The Culture. It is a place where money, crime, various bad aliens and regular warfare still exist.
If we don't get into space and expand to other star systems, then I believe the population of Earth will drastically fall. Most people contribute nothing to the world. Few will be remembered by anyone other than their families or close friends three months after they die.
When there is no longer work for people because robots do most everything, then there is no reason to procreate. We should start seeing a dramatic drop in births within 20 years, as long as AI/Automation/Robot technology is allowed to advance w/o some sort of modern Luddite kickback.
A side effect of high levels of economic growth would be that current levels of 'gov't debt as % gdp' would be much less. Free money! Techno-optimism is great!
But even neglecting astonishing growth rates, there seem to be many many areas where just implementing best practices would result in growth. Many businesses can't afford consultant teams, but AI could make expert advice readily available.
We are a lot closer to Human-AI than many want to acknowledge. But just like any technology, initial deployment will be limited function Ai but this capability of AI/robots will expand/extend exponentially. As Human jobs are replaced, deflation will take hold because AI/robots can work 24 x7 w/o rest or breaks and don't need to be paid. Eventually, all products will be free.
--------
Figure's humanoid robots are about to enter the workforce at BMW
By Loz Blain
January 18, 2024
Figure has signed its first commercial deal, and is sending its general-purpose humanoid robots off to start real-world work at BMW's manufacturing plant in South Carolina. Founder and CEO Brett Adcock talks us through this rubber-meets-road moment.
Emerging from stealth mode just 10 months ago, Figure has developed its robots at a frightening pace. The company had prototypes up and walking within a year of development, thanks to a highly experienced team – and at an impressive speed, too, compared with everything this side of the acrobatic Atlas bot from Boston Dynamics.
A little over a week ago, the company announced another milestone, releasing video of the Figure 01 robot autonomously making a coffee in response to a verbal command. Adcock called this a "ChatGPT moment" for the company, since the robot figured out how to use that coffee machine on its own after watching a bunch of video demonstrations.
Seems to me that the ownership of these new technologies matters A LOT in terms of the distribution of their benefit. Also matters a lot for the design of their use, i.e. whether AI and robotics will be used to maximize profit and/or displace other costs like labor and raw materials. Or will they be designed to maximize health, care and human welfare? These aren't entirely contradictory, but the differences are significant and could say a lot about how the transitions will play out.
Thank you for a great deep-dive and presenting a nuanced account that incorporates conflicting perspectives, Aden!
I am definitely curious to see the true impact of AI in the coming years and where it actually lands on the "hype" vs. "skepticism" spectrum.
Getting efficient in some ways will also highlight regulatory efficiencies. If a McMansion could be designed for $5k with AI, built for $25k with 3D printing, it'll still cost $750k to buy a plot of dirt in the central city that you're not allowed to put apartments on.
In California it costs ~$100k just for design approval, permits, etc. BEFORE you build a house. That 'industry' is going to fight tooth & nail against disintermediation and other threats like building a house for $25k that was designed by an AI.
This article immediately raises a few question areas in my mind:
1) How do we handle the 'waste' products from such rapid growth? What will they be? How will they be recycled or remediated? Microplastics are already causing concerns. What other unintended consequences will surface that may throttle this view of explosive growth?
2) People are not going to be good at adapting to rapid change. On the one hand we have a long childhood to develop and learn. On the other hand, extremely rapid growth in not only technology, goods, and services suggest that what we painfully learned last year will be superseded by what's new this year. A likely result is not learning basic life sustaining skills, disconnection from the systems that support life like agriculture and animal husbandry, let along the technical and blue collar skills that help us avoid total dependency upon others who now may be robots.
3) Then there is culture - how will different cultures choose to adapt to such rapid changes? I suggest that humanity may be best served by recognizing that several avenues of evolution are prudent to pursue for survival in some form. Here are some thoughts from a commentary I wrote in 2007 in response to an article on IVF regulation.
A speculation that I have related to the forces shaping the future of mankind.
"My early thinking that has evolved this speculation started with Jacob Bronowski's "The Ascent of Man" that I read many decades ago. The one key idea that his work left with me is that mankind has survived and thrived based upon his fecundity and willingness to explore the boundaries of his environments, whether they be of the mind, the spirit or the physical. Man is by nature an excellent toolmaker and the creations developed from his tools are what set us apart from the other creatures in our world. All of the global trends towards the acceleration of change, technology and information sharing tend to support this view of the nature of man. One consequence is that man will continue to shape his environment and consequently his own physical and mental persona. This is not an if. It is more of a how and when.
Therefore, I speculate that given the acceleration of change and opportunity as shared by Ray Kurzweil in "The Singularity is Near" and his other writings / books - that in this century it is quite possible that mankind begins to redefine the definition of man as represented by his progeny. Here are the five paths that I think are reasonable future evolutions of ourselves.
1. The natural man - mainly supported by religious groups who see God as the architect of nature and prefer that man not tinker with his nature. Only what nature has evolved via processes it has used over the millions of years of evolution are trusted enough to define man's evolution.
2. The genetically improved man - here the toolmaker works on first fixing the perceived defects of our genetic heritage. The good is that clearly harmful genetic heritage may be corrected in subsequent generations. The risk is that our lack of full understanding removes a level of robustness in our genetic history that makes us less capable of dealing with relatively rare threats, diseases, climate/environment change, etc. Hopefully, the good exceeds the risk. Here your work in regulating how we manage progress is challenged with balancing clear needs with real risks. Hence the need for posts like yours discussing the need for IVF regulation that results in transparency in the actions of those responsible for helping advance this general area of science.
3. The bio-electro-mechanically improved man - as we see brain implants for the control of computers, surgery to enhance eyesight, smart prosthetics, exoskeletons for greater load carrying (military and handicapped applications) and, not so romantic or desirable, the Borg of Star Trek, it is clear that the need from some to recover the normal capabilities of a person will extend into how much better can I be? As the complex needs of an ever more advanced society expand, specialized tasks require specialized tools that extend our capabilities. Only the imagination bounds the possibilities of how far this will extend. It is truly the grist of science fiction.
4.. Virtual man becomes our alter ego as virtual worlds become more practical and perhaps necessary for entertainment, socialization, training (via simulations), education and remote collaboration environments. How this part of our nature evolves depends, in part, upon the relative carbon costs of doing things in the real world as opposed to doing the equivalent in virtual spaces. It also seems to be driven by the relative real cost reduction of accomplishing the same objective by doing at least some of it in the virtual space.
5. Artificial man as represented by the continuing improvements in robotics and artificial intelligence. This seems perhaps a stretch and many are skeptical about truly sentient AI entities. I do not believe that man is so unique that his nature cannot be emulated and improved upon. Only time will tell us for sure. I will place my bet on this century being the breakthrough one for AIs as well.
These five paths are what I think our destiny offers. The paths are complex, the rules of engagement are yet to be defined and they will evolve with our progress. I trust that those, like you, who try to guide our evolution, balancing the risks and rewards, will keep your sights on the potential of our species, as it ascends in capabilities, and allow our tool-making nature enough freedom to evolve ourselves to survive beyond the realm of our planet. That day will come when our children will grow beyond the confines of our current home. They will need new tools, new capabilities and new "partners" to thrive in the harsher realms of our universe."
Generally it’s a good idea to throw out the wilder numbers when analyzing speculation. That thirty per cent growth number is ridiculous, as is the forty years to see automation everywhere. And nothing is mentioned regarding how the wealth and productivity gains will be distributed. A Star Trek economy where we no longer use money? We are going to have to advance socially far beyond today before we deal with the inequities that growth like that would cause. Fun to speculate but futurism is far from a science.
Eventually everything will be free, once AI's and their robot workers take over, if you believe in the future as written by SF author Iain M. Banks (passed), who presupposed a post-scarcity reality called the The Culture in 10 novels, which is ruled by sentient "Minds". Resources and energy are unlimited in this future and therefore money or power mean nothing. Warfare is mostly abolished and what does occur is between lesser races and The Culture machines. People live in huge spaceships always on the move between stars, capable of carrying billions, or on planets/moons, or in artificial orbital's, etc. This is a hedonistic universe where you can acquire, do or be almost anything you want (even change sexes and give birth). The Minds take care of all the details and people do what makes themselves happy. Mostly, the Minds don't get involved in petty BS among humans.
OTOH, another SF author named Neal Asher, created a universe is called the Polity that is also ruled by sentient machines. In this universe, the machines took over when we humans created yet another war among ourselves but the machines that were supposed to fight refused and instead took over all government and military functions. There is a big honkin AI in charge of everything and a lot of minor AI's that help do its bidding across the patch of the universe that it controls. There are no politicians (surely a good thing!). But AI's in this universe can go rogue (e.g. AI war machine Penny Royal) and create all sorts of mayhem, death and destruction. The Polity is far rawer than The Culture. It is a place where money, crime, various bad aliens and regular warfare still exist.
If we don't get into space and expand to other star systems, then I believe the population of Earth will drastically fall. Most people contribute nothing to the world. Few will be remembered by anyone other than their families or close friends three months after they die.
When there is no longer work for people because robots do most everything, then there is no reason to procreate. We should start seeing a dramatic drop in births within 20 years, as long as AI/Automation/Robot technology is allowed to advance w/o some sort of modern Luddite kickback.
A side effect of high levels of economic growth would be that current levels of 'gov't debt as % gdp' would be much less. Free money! Techno-optimism is great!
But even neglecting astonishing growth rates, there seem to be many many areas where just implementing best practices would result in growth. Many businesses can't afford consultant teams, but AI could make expert advice readily available.
We are a lot closer to Human-AI than many want to acknowledge. But just like any technology, initial deployment will be limited function Ai but this capability of AI/robots will expand/extend exponentially. As Human jobs are replaced, deflation will take hold because AI/robots can work 24 x7 w/o rest or breaks and don't need to be paid. Eventually, all products will be free.
--------
Figure's humanoid robots are about to enter the workforce at BMW
By Loz Blain
January 18, 2024
Figure has signed its first commercial deal, and is sending its general-purpose humanoid robots off to start real-world work at BMW's manufacturing plant in South Carolina. Founder and CEO Brett Adcock talks us through this rubber-meets-road moment.
Emerging from stealth mode just 10 months ago, Figure has developed its robots at a frightening pace. The company had prototypes up and walking within a year of development, thanks to a highly experienced team – and at an impressive speed, too, compared with everything this side of the acrobatic Atlas bot from Boston Dynamics.
A little over a week ago, the company announced another milestone, releasing video of the Figure 01 robot autonomously making a coffee in response to a verbal command. Adcock called this a "ChatGPT moment" for the company, since the robot figured out how to use that coffee machine on its own after watching a bunch of video demonstrations.
...
https://newatlas.com/robotics/figure-bmw-humanoid/
Interesting thanks! I definitely want to do some reporting on the state of robotics this year.
This may be helpful for that task:
--
Video Friday: Agile but Safe Your weekly selection of awesome robot videos
EVAN ACKERMAN
2 Feb 2024
https://spectrum.ieee.org/video-friday-agile-but-safe
Maybe this is not the right place to post this, but what happened to the promise of APM?
i.e. Drexlerian molecular manufacturing.
Surely AI can be a big boost in developing the first working prototype of a matter compiler using convergent assembly.
https://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/convergent.html
But, you don't hear about APM nowadays.
Seems to me that the ownership of these new technologies matters A LOT in terms of the distribution of their benefit. Also matters a lot for the design of their use, i.e. whether AI and robotics will be used to maximize profit and/or displace other costs like labor and raw materials. Or will they be designed to maximize health, care and human welfare? These aren't entirely contradictory, but the differences are significant and could say a lot about how the transitions will play out.