AI is literally already creating those things now. Thinking a few years down the line... bumpy ride ahead!
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Could ChatGPT Replace Audio Writers?
- Thread starter Dismayed
- Start date
OP
- Thread Starter
- #82
Of course I’m a Commie. I earned my MBA at U Chicago. So I know what a load of crap goes into economic theory!Careful, you're starting to sound like a DIRTY COMMIE!
But realistically, yes. Most economic systems we know of are predicated on scarcity and labor. If scarcity and labor go away because machines effortlessly give us everything we ask for, so SHOULD the economic system, to be replaced with something that comports with the new economic reality. If not, we should expect undesirable results.
What is interesting about this concept that hasn't been addressed anywhere I know of is how we would assign property rights to land. Who gets to live in the nice areas if nobody is working for money anymore? Almost everything that has a monetary value has that value because of the labor that goes into it. Real estate is an exception, it's valued via legal fiat and scarcity. AI may be able to do almost anything in the future, but it won't be able to create more oceanfront property out of nowhere.
So it seems we will still need money, but the means by which we might earn it are far from obvious if we're assuming "jobs are a thing of the past". Gambling maybe?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #83
We’re on our way - we seem to be over-producing Epsilons.
Ha, a Booth guy huh? I studied econ at Northwestern, so similarly learned just enough to be even more deeply disappointed with how economies are managed. The upside is I don't automatically break out in hives and start screaming if someone raises one of the '-isms' in discussion, which apparently most people do.
By believing fear is the only emotion, I still enjoy the company of others, but instead of saying someone in particular is more deserving of my affection or kindness, everyone becomes more or less equal. Love is just a solution for a dog eat dog world. A drug to escape from painful reality. The more we invest in love, the less we invest in making the world less dog eat dog. I think we can't have both.
Last edited:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #86
My challenge is that I was a scientist before going to business school. I completed all of the course work for a PhD in Physical Chemistry, but skipped out on the dissertation. So I’m skeptical of economic models because the assumptions are laughable.
MBA economics are just watered-down undergraduate economics from what I've seen, so I can see why you'd say that.
I do think it's very important to know what the assumptions ARE, though - it tells you exactly how credible people's assertions about economics are, which is usually zero because they don't even understand how markets are supposed to work, let alone how they actually work.
Unlike 'hard' sciences most people will never use the tools they learn in economics to do actual economics. However, they are good tools or at least heuristic approaches for analyzing behavior, which I find interesting.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #88
The economics weren’t watered down at U Chicago. We read massive numbers of journal articles. And I took option pricing as an elective. About 1/3 of my class graduated summa from undergrad schools that were highly competitive. So they put us on a bell curve centered on C+. In the first accounting class they flunked 5%, gave 10% D’s, 45% got C’s. And the difference between a high C and a low A was 13 points out of 400. It made everyone neurotic - no cooperation because it might give a competitor a leg up. It truly is a place where fun goes to die.
I worked long ago for a former Booz Allen consultant who had an MBA from Northwestern. He claimed that I had a graduate Econ degree, and not an MBA. That’s why he hired me.
Or they have a book that says "to serve man" and we later find out that its a cookbook.It seems funny Now! Wait until they communicate with their “Pet Humans” via anally inserted brain probing devices. This is that human predicted event aptly referred to as SHTF moment….
Or "make the temperature of the earth 1 degree cooler in 100 years."
On the other hand, many millennials would push a button to kill their own grandparents if they were told that it would make the world more "sustainable". Using that particular word would make them do what the machines might not.
I have actually heard the econ is more rigorous there, although from what I saw, real graduate-level econ doesn't make a lot of absurd assumptions in the models, of course.
Punter
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2022
- Messages
- 146
- Likes
- 835
I actually made a reference to mastering in the question based on what my colleague wanted to see. However I wasn't expecting perfection, it's just an example.
A wrong one!
That's going to take a very smug AI, indeed.
Foxenfurter
Active Member
Just tried ChatBot - hoping it can take away the drudge work of writing simple code. This worked fine - guess I am going to get real lazy!
Foxenfurter
Active Member
On a more serious note I read that engineers are being hired to write and annotate this sort of code. But it sounds like that the interview process may be being abused, i.e. as part of the interview process, the engineers are being asked to write and annotate code examples - which obviously can be used to train ChatBot. Prior to this they had been scanning GitHub, but so much code was not commented that the AI training wasn't very valuable.
It was hard to write, it should be hard to read.
Training our replacements... wonderful
OP
- Thread Starter
- #100
Look deeply and you’ll see some outrageous assumptions. The macro DSGE differential equations are unsolvable without silly assumptions.
Similar threads
