|
I'm currently evaluating an automation product for work - Amazon Polly. It's a text-to-speech service that might help with producing audio books. It's not quite there yet, but it comes with a Markup Language so you can alter individual words and phonemes that didn't turn out right. We probably won't use it after all but it's close - a year from now we probably will. Good news for blind people who will get easier access to audio books, bad news for professional voice actors. :/
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 13:41 |
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:I'm currently evaluating an automation product for work - Amazon Polly. It's a text-to-speech service that might help with producing audio books. It's not quite there yet, but it comes with a Markup Language so you can alter individual words and phonemes that didn't turn out right. We probably won't use it after all but it's close - a year from now we probably will. Huh. I actually had to do an evaluation like this for a client a couple of months ago and came to a similar conclusion. Text-to-speech is way, way closer to "good enough" than I think a lot of people realize right now. It's going to be interesting to see where it is in five or ten years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
It's very good for short stuff. In longer paragraphs it lacks a natural rhythm that a human has.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
Kerning Chameleon posted:From what I can tell, posters who go off on self-driving car tears are just using it as an excuse to complain about American car culture, and how SDCs somehow rob them of an opportunity to kill it once and for all. Maybe they should stop complaining about car culture and instead complain about the political culture where anything that benefits filthy commoners like us is treated like a frivolous luxury - including properly maintaining the infrastructure we have, let alone upgrading our public transportation to the point of rendering car culture obsolete. It is for that reason that robo-Lyft is a more realistic solution.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
Upgrading public transportation is itself politically infeasible though. First you'd need to redo zoning all over the place to permit higher population densities and street design that balances modes rather than favoring cars all the time. Good luck doing those things without local residents (especially in the suburbs) screaming bloody murder. Then you have to somehow convince people to invest tons of money into a system that currently only a very small % of people actually use. Okay okay, those things aren't completely impossible, but they're drat hard to make progress on even in ostensibly liberal areas. A large part of the left is basically convinced that pretty much any kind of development is bad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Upgrading public transportation is itself politically infeasible though. First you'd need to redo zoning all over the place to permit higher population densities and street design that balances modes rather than favoring cars all the time. Good luck doing those things without local residents (especially in the suburbs) screaming bloody murder. Then you have to somehow convince people to invest tons of money into a system that currently only a very small % of people actually use. And yet the PNW recently voted for a significant tax increase to bring light rail all over the place - Sound Transit 3. Yes, it even goes to the suburbs! If I weren’t phone posting I’d provide the expansion map, it’s rather significant. Solkanar512 fucked around with this message at 14:46 on Dec 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
Yes, I'm very aware of ST3. That's why I said it wasn't impossible, just drat hard. Just look at the car tab backlash ST3 generated in a liberal state. I guess I should've said, "getting actually good transit (i.e. separated grade, frequent service, wide range) is politically infeasible in most of the country". edit: for example, Portland is comparably liberal to Seattle but seems to be largely resting on its laurels now as far as transit goes. Cicero fucked around with this message at 15:10 on Dec 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 14:50
|
|
|
Don't be fooled by Oregon's reputation. They're largely terrified of any tax increase no matter the reason, and just love to pat themselves on the back for being #woke.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 15:18
|
|
|
So companies want to automate forklifts now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dniCQ39ZM9s I could easily see this putting people out of a job if they can work out kinks with imperfect loads and things like that
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
Oh but you see that forklift could be easily tricked by snow or someone painting the back of a truck on a wall so REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Tasmantor posted:Oh but you see that forklift could be easily tricked by snow or someone painting the back of a truck on a wall so REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE Don’t be dense. Working vehicles are nothing alike, low operating speeds, stopping as a near 100% effective avoidance or confusion mitigation strategy, guarantee of operators on standby even if the facility has less employees total. Similar constraints as that automated excavation vehicle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
Pretty sure Tasmantor was being sarcastic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
Magius1337est posted:So companies want to automate forklifts now This is a weird way to talk about something that's already here and has been in real commercial operation for years now. Automated vehicles in warehouses and factory floors are 100% already a thing, they just aren't widely adopted (yet). This is from 2015: http://www.wsj.com/video/constellation-brews-a-fully-automated-factory/93A60C0E-B75E-4D37-9D3C-30BF794D9ABB.html It's easy (relatively speaking anyway) to automate this kind of stuff when you have total control of the workflow from beginning to end and you can design your physical space in a way that's more suitable for machines than humans. Paradoxish fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Dec 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 23:36
|
|
|
So the team behind AlphaGo has been busy, apparently. After AlphaGo beat the world champion, they started working on a revised version of it, called AlphaGo Zero. Instead of being trained on lots of previous games, it was essentially just fed the basic ruleset and then played games against itself. With no other input except that, it became good enough to beat AlphaGo. Then they took it another step and generalized it even further, to AlphaZero which isn't specific to any one game. Using the same setup of 'here are the rules, play against yourself until you get good' it was able to learn go, chess, and shogi to a level that could beat the best existing AI players of those games within 24 hours. The paper is here if you'd like to peruse it while worrying about what happens when they tell AlphaZero to try its hands at stock trading: https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.01815
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
BobTheJanitor posted:So the team behind AlphaGo has been busy, apparently. After AlphaGo beat the world champion, they started working on a revised version of it, called AlphaGo Zero. Instead of being trained on lots of previous games, it was essentially just fed the basic ruleset and then played games against itself. With no other input except that, it became good enough to beat AlphaGo. Then they took it another step and generalized it even further, to AlphaZero which isn't specific to any one game. Using the same setup of 'here are the rules, play against yourself until you get good' it was able to learn go, chess, and shogi to a level that could beat the best existing AI players of those games within 24 hours. Holy cow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
BobTheJanitor posted:So the team behind AlphaGo has been busy, apparently. After AlphaGo beat the world champion, they started working on a revised version of it, called AlphaGo Zero. Instead of being trained on lots of previous games, it was essentially just fed the basic ruleset and then played games against itself. With no other input except that, it became good enough to beat AlphaGo. Then they took it another step and generalized it even further, to AlphaZero which isn't specific to any one game. Using the same setup of 'here are the rules, play against yourself until you get good' it was able to learn go, chess, and shogi to a level that could beat the best existing AI players of those games within 24 hours. They should tell it to solve world hunger.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
BobTheJanitor posted:it was able to learn go, chess, and shogi Read Shogo and was pretty pumped to have automated 13 year old poo poo talkers trashing me in the online games.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
Magius1337est posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dniCQ39ZM9s This line of thinking always seems so funny when applied specifically to things like forklifts. Like forklifts themselves are machines that let one man do 100 men's work in a day. Like just by existing they took a huge number of physical labor jobs out of the market and that is generally seen as good, but going any further than this is bad, I guess?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
It's bad when the forklift operators can't get a job anymore and the number of new jobs being invented is nowhere near enough to employ everyone who loses one. But this is an argument you've been ignoring/blind to for the duration of the thread so this is my tilt at the windmill I guess.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
https://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Aurora-Makes-Any-Helicopter-Autonomous-230012-1.htmlquote:A system developed by Aurora Flight Sciences can be installed on any rotary-wing aircraft and enable it to fly autonomously, the company said in a news release on Wednesday. The Office of Naval Research will conduct a final demonstration of the system next week, December 13, at the Marine Corps’ urban training center in Quantico, Virginia. The system can be operated by any Marine in the field, “intuitively and quickly, from a hand-held tablet, without prior training required,” Aurora said, making it easy to request supplies even in austere or dangerous environments. A UH-1 “Huey” helicopter will be flown in the demo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
withak posted:They should tell it to solve world hunger. skynet is born
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
yeah if I was a DM and a player wished to end world hunger, i'd kill every starving person e: or make it so they know the location of other starving people and go and eat them
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 09:50
|
|
|
withak posted:They should tell it to solve world hunger. The problem with most problems is that we don't have a good definition of them. Given a good definition of a problem the rules and what is allowed or not. Many are trivial. Tei fucked around with this message at 11:21 on Dec 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 11:18
|
|
|
rule #1: always fallow rule #2 rule #2: never make spelling errors
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 12:15
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:It's bad when the forklift operators can't get a job anymore and the number of new jobs being invented is nowhere near enough to employ everyone who loses one. But this is an argument you've been ignoring/blind to for the duration of the thread so this is my tilt at the windmill I guess. It's just such a silly fear when applied to forklifts. A device that already 'steals' hundreds of jobs by providing the lifting power of a large team.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 13:19
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:It's bad when the forklift operators can't get a job anymore Why is it bad? Because they need to have a job. But why do they need to have a job?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 14:06
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It's just such a silly fear when applied to forklifts. A device that already 'steals' hundreds of jobs by providing the lifting power of a large team. You are right that there is nothing new or revolutionary about this. But I think the point is that this type of automation can't go on forever. Sooner or alter we will start getting into a territory where every human task can be performed by a machine and that will be a huge game changer. A lot of people see the commercialization of AIs/"thinking machines" like that forklift as a sign that we are getting closer to that point. We might have entered the endgame of a hundreds of years long process.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It's just such a silly fear when applied to forklifts. A device that already 'steals' hundreds of jobs by providing the lifting power of a large team. It would be if you could ever once find a single piece of technology that had any downsides what so ever instead of being a constant cheerleader.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 14:45
|
|
|
The problem isn't really displacing jobs, which is to the long-term betterment of society, it's what happens to the people who got displaced afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
Raspberry Jam It In Me posted:You are right that there is nothing new or revolutionary about this. But I think the point is that this type of automation can't go on forever. Sooner or alter we will start getting into a territory where every human task can be performed by a machine and that will be a huge game changer. A lot of people see the commercialization of AIs/"thinking machines" like that forklift as a sign that we are getting closer to that point. We might have entered the endgame of a hundreds of years long process. It seems like the end game would surely be the forklift that stole millions or billions of potential jobs instead of the forklift AI that stole thousands of jobs. It seems like if this is an issue that this is the weirdest place to take a stand on it. Forklifts already 'steal' more jobs than probably exist on earth but we aren't supposed to worry about it until someone steals the forklift guy's job?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 15:00
|
|
|
That would be a pretty stupid way to think of an 'end game', considering the 'game' is clearly not over yet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:This line of thinking always seems so funny when applied specifically to things like forklifts. Like forklifts themselves are machines that let one man do 100 men's work in a day. Like just by existing they took a huge number of physical labor jobs out of the market and that is generally seen as good, but going any further than this is bad, I guess? You're right, because there was nothing about the 1910s-1940s that would have led to labor shortages along with higher production needs. At this point, you're just being willfully obtuse about the specific conditions that allowed the 20th Century (particularly 20th Century America) to weather increases in automation at a level that isn't sustainable anymore.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It seems like the end game would surely be the forklift that stole millions or billions of potential jobs instead of the forklift AI that stole thousands of jobs. It seems like if this is an issue that this is the weirdest place to take a stand on it. Forklifts already 'steal' more jobs than probably exist on earth but we aren't supposed to worry about it until someone steals the forklift guy's job? It's not about the number, it's about the type of jobs/form of labor. You do agree that automation is a finite process, right? At some point you will be able to automate every form of human labor. There will be no possible new jobs for humans in a free market economy at that point. How do you disagree with that? Mozi posted:That would be a pretty stupid way to think of an 'end game', considering the 'game' is clearly not over yet. In chess, where that colloquialism comes from, you know very well when you have entered the endgame. I'm not sure what your point is. All attempts of making predictions about the future are useless?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
Raspberry Jam It In Me posted:It's not about the number, it's about the type of jobs/form of labor. You don't think a world where human and digital intelligences labor as partners will have new jobs?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
Rastor posted:You don't think a world where human and digital intelligences labor as partners will have new jobs? Stupid people have this idea that a) everyone must work and b) it’s important to keep everything as it is now because they can’t imagine a future that looks different People will always find some way to exploit each other, instead of trying to keep people in their place maybe we should start promoting changes to help increase automation and also improve the lives of individuals that doesn’t require exploitation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
I'll go back to this post, because it seems to be the belief you're staking your entire claim on:Owlofcreamcheese posted:In the future people there will be lots of jobs doing things that were not seen as worth employing people to do, since labor could be more usefully applied to more important things. That's always how it's gone. I think this is a major misunderstanding of what drives employment. "Importance" doesn't enter the equation at all. From an infrastructure standpoint, it's more important to have welders and electricians than mobile game developers, but there is a shortage in one of those industries and not in the other. When asking "is this job worth doing?", the only consideration is whether the benefit outweighs the cost of the labor to do it. I'm not sure why you think that people facing stagnating wages are suddenly going to decide they have the spare cash to hire a former warehouse worker to organize their beanie babies or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
Raspberry Jam It In Me posted:You do agree that automation is a finite process, right? At some point you will be able to automate every form of human labor. There will be no possible new jobs for humans in a free market economy at that point. How do you disagree with that? It just seems bonkers to worry about what job you would have after some claimed singularity. It seems like some guy from the 800s seeing a vision of 2017 and just not being able to understand how he'd water his crops if he lived in new york city no matter how many times someone points out almost no one is a farmer he just won't have crops probably. That as things change life restructures. If machines become able to do everything imaginable at a human level life will be restructured top to bottom in so many more ways than how you earn a paycheck.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
Baronash posted:I'll go back to this post, because it seems to be the belief you're staking your entire claim on: The entertainment industry is bigger than ever, service industries are also constantly growing, your assumption that all business is determined by perfect actors is flawed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 13:41 |
|
|
ElCondemn posted:The entertainment industry is bigger than ever, service industries are also constantly growing, your assumption that all business is determined by perfect actors is flawed. If you include youtube personalities, then sure, the entertainment industry in growing (while also moving CGI jobs overseas). I think it's pretty obvious why there's a limit to the expansion of that industry: You need an incredibly high consumer:producer rate for it to be economically viable, and most of the self-produced field still has to supplement their income with side jobs. And the modern service industry is fueled by a low minimum wage (and in the case of Uber-esque contracting work, below minimum wage), so it's not a great example of what we ought to be striving for as a society. Baronash fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Dec 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 17:22
|
|