| ▲ | pendenthistory a day ago | |||||||
Ok, but go through the bottle necks you face. How many of then will 1. go away with better models, and 2. go away when those bottle necks (other people) are automated away? For me, I can go quite fast because I work alone, no other people in a team to slow me down, but verifying the result is still a bottle neck. Also interacting with government agencies, my accountant etc, still a bottle neck. None of these are technically insurmountable, and I suspect that when one of these becomes a real bottle neck for the entire economy, they will be fixed. | ||||||||
| ▲ | jerf 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
How many of them will go away? To a first approximation, none of them. There's a huge difference between "zero" and "a little" when it comes to Amdahl's Law and scaling up, let alone the things where it won't be "a little". Which is one of those things that sounds obvious when I say it. But clearly a lot of people are predicting a future that is based on costs and times being "zero" that won't be. | ||||||||
| ▲ | ben_w a day ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
Right now, the most visible bottleneck is real world robotic control. I kinda hope that one stays around for a long time, because robots controlled by AI competent enough to guide those robots through every step in their production from mining raw materials to end-of-assemble acceptance testing, is one where tiny mistakes kill everyone. Like, say you've got a sticky 0 key and accidentally ask for more burgers than there is carbon in Earth's biosphere and atmosphere combined: if the sufficiently-competent AI is a little too eager to obey and not quite willing enough to say "no" or listen when told to "stop", that's enough to kill everyone. | ||||||||
| ||||||||