We agree. STEM workers transfer repetitive jobs to software and robots. What remains is creative work and the demand for human creativity, in all facets of life, is unlimited.
-
-
Replying to @naval @EricRWeinstein and
Where is it written that there will always be creative work that is *best* done by humans? And what guarantees that most humans will be able to do that work?
42 replies 29 retweets 313 likes -
Replying to @SamHarrisOrg @naval and
As a professional creative person with experience coding, I’d bet on the robots. My internal creative processes feel entirely programmable. Combine that code with rapid audience testing and I’d give human artists ten more years, tops.
30 replies 33 retweets 263 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays @SamHarrisOrg and
I would take the other side of that bet, if well structured. But of course the bar for creativity (that’s in demand) keeps rising as the tools get better.
10 replies 5 retweets 134 likes -
Replying to @naval @ScottAdamsSays and
I would agree w/ Naval here for the most demanding creative tasks in the next 10-20 years. But I don’t think this says much about Sam’s point. And even so, most of us aren’t going to be sufficiently creative to exploit current opportunities w/ sub-AGI deep learning machines.
12 replies 0 retweets 33 likes -
Replying to @EricRWeinstein @naval and
Please define creative ( beyond "non repetitive") ? There is much confusion around this word and kids are simply deciding they are " creatives" because they like to doodle.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @davidarredondo @EricRWeinstein and
Creativity is bridging discontinuities in a search space.
2 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @EricRWeinstein and
That's your definition of creativity?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @davidarredondo @EricRWeinstein and
Yes. It often involves re-describing an aspect of the universe in new ways and inventing new models. There is no secret sauce in bio brains that will not be available to artificial ones.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @EricRWeinstein and
Fair but limited and rests on parochial assumptions. ( No new ecologies in universe and *secret sauce * ) Close enough for conversation about human jobs.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
How would you define it?
-
-
Replying to @Plinz @AndrewYang
My opinion doesn't matter here but of course, that would depend on context and setting, shared (and unshared), assumptions, and *knowledge base* and developmental stage of the other.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.