Why you need to work with the machine, not against it | Hacker News Reader

Why you need to work with the machine, not against it

venturebeat.com

36 pointsjmtame11 comments

Computers _can_ be creative http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer-generated_imagery http://www.synthzone.com/compgen.htm and intuitive http://csis.pace.edu/~ctappert/srd2007/d2.pdf.

Also, human-like artificial general intelligence seems likely to be achieved, as does actual emulation or simulation of the most relevant aspects of the operation of human brains. See one of Kurzweil's videos from a Google search (he is the one who convinced me originally).

http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm I think Brain's conclusion is more logical.

I think Kurzweil is right in that we will merge with the machines. I also think that Jacque Fresco is right when he points out that technology is actually oppositional to our outdated economic model. However I think that Fresco's solution is a bit 50sish and much too over-centralized to be practical and constructive.

Typo in the Bloc.io link URL in the closing line, block.io should be bloc.io : "Jared Tame is a co-founder and mentor at Bloc, where he’s teaching people how to become web developers in 8 weeks."

http://bloc.io

That didn't seem very cohesive or insightful.

I found that: "We’re experiencing the natural and healthy fluctuations of a market that is deeply starved for technical skills, or at least people who can use their creativity and intuition in unison with technology."

Is something that escapes a lot of people these days and something I agree with and have taken notice of for a while, so it may not be insightful to some but I believe it can help a lot of people to find perspective.

The original version was a bit more harsh and I had to revise it. I was fairly critical of people who went into debt over liberal arts degrees and argued that if you're going into debt, do it in a degree that's going to make a return on your investment.

Edit: the original article is here if you're interested http://jmtame.posterous.com/private/kjInGGicAa

I have three liberal arts degrees and think your criticism is completely valid. People shouldn't go into debt for liberal arts degrees. If you're good enough you'll get a full ride; if not, you're only being admitted as slave labor to fill lower division teaching slots[1].

Unfortunately, most people who pursue liberal arts degrees aren't interested in "technical" subjects. And when you get down to brass tacks, what someone is capable of is largely a function of what interests them.

1. Not to knock teaching. It was one of my favorite parts of grad school.

I really don't look forward to a future where everyone is some variant of a STEM major. Talk about pedantry and a lack of cultural texture...

The reference to the Redditor that automated his work and took a disproportionate portion of the bonus pool was a strong example of changes to come. Any thoughts on that piece?

An opinion: anything which is that easy to turn into a process will be commoditised.

The Reddit question wasn't really what I would consider relevant for HN, but I personally found the ethical issues at least a little bit interesting. I commented on it: my thoughts being that he should stay under the radar of management and do side work to earn more money. This is by no means ethical, and I'm assuming a fairly dysfunctional company structure, but in my experience that's the way things work in the real world.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com