However, the sad truth is that most people do not have the intellectual capabilities to do significant research in those hard problems. So I agree with the grandparent post.
We should work at it and see where we can get.
(And hopefully by the time we bump against the ceiling implants and genetics will come to our aid.)
Imagine that you're one in the small percent of people with the capacity to do this work. (Some of you may be in that group.) Think about how hard it would be to try to participate, assuming you're not 'in the network'.
only one of those three jobs is necessarily a product of intelligence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7tYwnqot6M
> or serve me food while playing a violin at a restaurant at my tenth wedding anniversary,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOLL59nIkrA
> or perform a moving and/or erotic song and dance at a concert.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kM3n64WJmo
> Well, we could, but none of those things would go over well or have the desired effect.
People seem to be enjoying the last 2 robots plenty. As for the first one, robot nurses, I think they'll massively prefer it over not having anyone. Baby boomers didn't have nearly enough kids, so they won't have any reasonable amount of attendants during old age. People that were never born can't take care of them. This is especially true in Europe, but even in America it's a pretty reasonable argument to make.
> We also can't make a robot to make startling leaps like "hey, I think the PHASES OF THE MOON are controlling the strength of the tides! Holy crap!"
I think you need to visit a university. Or even better, a pharma company, or an oil company. The times of people making those associations are long, long over. Now people clean databases before they get fed into the computers that make the real discoveries, and fix any blockages in the equipment. Oh and implement the bureaucracy, of course.
Mathematical discoveries, it's been 2 years now since one was actually made by a human. It's been decades since the last real mathematical discovery that wasn't at least "proof-assisted". Same goes for physics and it's becoming more and more true in chemistry (it's already true in commercial chemistry and pharma).
At the very least she shows the potential for it. Besides. Google "actroid" and tell me you don't find those things at least a bit attractive ?
> the robot restaurant is a gimmick,
True. There are better ones though, and every 2-3 years seems to bring a better one.
> and study after study has demonstrated that people need actual human contact in the nursery and in times of stress or illness. People who are raised by machines fail to thrive.
If that's true, then the future will suck. People that were never born can't care for anyone, and the babyboomers didn't have anywhere near the numbers of kids necessary to care for them. So this will happen, good or bad.
> People who are visited and cared for by human beings recover better from all manner of illnesses. When I said that we could automate these jobs but they would fail, I was not speaking from ignorance.
Again, sounds cool, but very impractical.