Hey Wally this was a great read. While I agree that creating specifically purposed robots/machines/AI will achieve scale and speed, a part of me struggle with these thoughts:
- does creating/designing robots/AI to for specific purpose remove humans from that purpose ? Therefore fast forward to the future, will this dependence cause a subsequent downfall of human independence in life ?
- does building specific purpose robots/AI mean removing the need for humans to perform the same task that a robot can do? For example, no more stoves since the robot can create food from a replicator that an ordinary human does not know how to repair if broken. When a farm machine breaks down today: 1) we know how to fix it 2) we can always scale back to human farming because the machines mimic human process.
When we make robot hands that perform as well as human hands, aren't we just keeping the human hand as a relevant tool going forward, preserving the thousands of years our environment and our hands have evolved to exist together?
David, thank you so much for reading! I like you comment and questions. Your basic idea as I see it is the idea that creating machines for a specific purpose might also remove us from that same purpose. I tend to think the danger isn’t in specialization itself but in disconnection. A robot hand modeled on the human hand, as you said, keeps us in the loop. It extends human capability rather than replacing it. The real question may be whether we continue to design AI and robotics as extensions of human purpose or as substitutes for it. Cheers, Wally
Hey Wally this was a great read. While I agree that creating specifically purposed robots/machines/AI will achieve scale and speed, a part of me struggle with these thoughts:
- does creating/designing robots/AI to for specific purpose remove humans from that purpose ? Therefore fast forward to the future, will this dependence cause a subsequent downfall of human independence in life ?
- does building specific purpose robots/AI mean removing the need for humans to perform the same task that a robot can do? For example, no more stoves since the robot can create food from a replicator that an ordinary human does not know how to repair if broken. When a farm machine breaks down today: 1) we know how to fix it 2) we can always scale back to human farming because the machines mimic human process.
When we make robot hands that perform as well as human hands, aren't we just keeping the human hand as a relevant tool going forward, preserving the thousands of years our environment and our hands have evolved to exist together?
Cheers!
David
David, thank you so much for reading! I like you comment and questions. Your basic idea as I see it is the idea that creating machines for a specific purpose might also remove us from that same purpose. I tend to think the danger isn’t in specialization itself but in disconnection. A robot hand modeled on the human hand, as you said, keeps us in the loop. It extends human capability rather than replacing it. The real question may be whether we continue to design AI and robotics as extensions of human purpose or as substitutes for it. Cheers, Wally