|
|
|
|
|
by crdoconnor
3380 days ago
|
|
"In the 1990s, it was very probably a naive comment about the state of the art of AI at the time." And it's exactly the same right now. Any competent discussion also needs to take into the account the various special interests who want it to be believed that AI is taking over irrespective of whether that is the truth or not... and why they want that. It also needs to take into account the various crass errors in many of the economics papers on this topic - including basing the probability of automation on how "creative" an economist considers a job (Oxford) or creating economic measures which make no mathematical distinction between a Chinese factory worker and a robot (Ball State University). |
|