Artificial Intelligence and the future | André LeBlanc | TEDxMoncton

This talk was given at a local TEDx event, produced independently of the TED Conferences. In his talk, Andre will explain the current and future impacts of Artificial Intelligence on industry, science, and how it will benefit and accelerate human progress.

With almost 20 years of business experience, André has a track record of success with multiple multi-million dollar ventures in multiple industries that have spanned the continent. His latest company works in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and has created a one-of-a-kind neural network that simulates a growing neocortex. This system of neurons uses evolutionary concepts to self-organize to complete tasks only previously achievable by humans. Most futurists and experts believe that by 2035, AI will match and eventually surpass human intelligence.

About TEDx, x = independently organized event In the spirit of ideas worth spreading, TEDx is a program of local, self-organized events that bring people together to share a TED-like experience. At a TEDx event, TEDTalks video and live speakers combine to spark deep discussion and connection in a small group. These local, self-organized events are branded TEDx, where x = independently organized TED event. The TED Conference provides general guidance for the TEDx program, but individual TEDx events are self-organized.* (*Subject to certain rules and regulations)

[DFaustus]

Viewing this TED talk for the first time after almost 3 years from its release, just in that short period of time advancement in our technology has advanced faster than the previous three years.

Part of his talk, is almost identical to what I heard back in the 70's on how future developments was going to make life better, how we only need to work 22 hours a week and spend more time doing what we like to do. Here it is 50 years later, the wealth gap between the rich and the poor has increased, the rich get richer and the poorer gets poorer.

In Marx’s days, Marx made a distinction between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie one the resources and the means of production. The technology of the industrial revolution gave much wealth to the owners of the technology of that era.

From the seventies to the present we still see that trend, advancement in technology benefits those who own the technology. Contemporary workers have been replaced by computer's and robotics. The car manufacture industry is a classic case where thousands of workers were displaced by the technology in favour of profits for the industry and its investors.

Some will argue that new jobs will be created, yes only in a limited sense. However, having said that many of the traditional jobs will be wiped out. We see it now with driverless cars, once that technology is perfected, who will need cab drivers, bus driver, etc.

Eventually we will design devices that will be able to repair itself and even replicate itself.

In order for the so called good life to happen as a result of technology our whole system of economy will have to change.

If it doesn’t we will see more poverty, and an even greater between the haves and have nots. The new bourgeoisie will own the technology. It Ironical, but these technological advancements may end up being the feudal system on steroids.

[wfpnknw]

the difference with the argicultural or industrial revolution was that then we still had something we were better at. 
If we're no longer the best or even comparable at creativity or learning, what will we do?..

[manyyou]

If they don't kill us, make them do all of our works, so I can stick my head to a virtual reality game for the rest of eternity.

[jimjones]

Interesting topic. Not an interesting speaker.

[trncfrmr]

Very interesting talk André! I really enjoy this subject, in fact I studied and work as a computer engineer (nothing related to AI, unfortunately) and I have read most of Ray Kurzweil's books and watched most of his presentations and interviews which are closely related to most of the the things that you talked about. I have myself my own theories about what will happen in the future: I believe that human intelligence can not only be imitated by machines but overcome in a near future (no more than a few decades) and that the most intelligent programs won't be good or evil, just as we aren't 100% any of those two things but a mixture of both. I don't think that the problem imitating human intelligence (general artifical intelligence) is a matter of resources and I don't think it should be solved by copying the brain's structure. In my own humble opinion, it is a problem of understanding the way our thoughts work from a very basic psychological perspective and then working all the way up. The only reason for not having smart AI's nowadays is because we aren't smart and knowledgeable enough to build them... yet. I'm very confident that we'll be soon enough though.

[derekonlinenow]

I think we are overestimating and underestimating some things about A.I.

[TheLazyKey]

He really waters down the threat of a potential virtual adversary. We're already so dependent on the internet and computers in general. By the time we have AI that's really worth worrying about, this is going to be even more true. We can't afford to have this dependency compromised. Or at least, the fallout of such a situation would take decades, if not centuries to recover from.

It may be worth noting that I am a strong advocate for AI, especially when it come to general, human-esque AI.

[LegHumanist]

Artificial Intelligence research is not improving at an exponential rate. Not even remotely. That's the biggest flaw in Kurzweil's projections.

[MonkeyspankO]

Once it has reached a certain level of intelligence, we need to talk about its rights.  Or we are talking slavery. An industrial machine is not an AI. 

[DrDress]

I doubt he has a math or science degree. If he did he would be so excited about exponential functions, he'd be scared as hell. Look up the concept: "bifurcation" in relation to chaos physics.

He can say "It's gonna be good" as many times as he likes, that's doesn't nescesarrily make it true.

[charlesmartin]

Just because every leap in technology has created new jobs up to the present, does not necessarily mean that will always be true in the future.

[_BobaFett_]

“I cannot believe people 25 years ago used to lay on their beds and scroll through social media…”

[dantheman]

That was.. an awful talk. Was this about A.I. or the advancing rate of technology?

[wildreams]

9:00 Did he just say "feel your boobs"?

[vz-Hello-ANewDay]

I think any of us whose life (likely all of us) is/would be affected by this rushing and mind-blowing rate of technological development & information accumulation, while in parallel our moral standards and emotional balances are not necessarily growing with the decision-making demands borne out of this advance, should be given the time & respect by people who are developing these technologies to seriously and conscientiously assess said technologies. An open, public dialogue, perhaps.

For example, I find that simulating humans to find cures for diseases with AI sounds beneficial, but is it difficult for us to imagine the anxiety and frantic competition people might go into if a method to drastically increase information in our brains is pushed out? And what kinds of information might AIs be gathering - would they be truly targeted at increasing our intrinsic quality of living?

What about the existential crises our communities might face if many people (such as myself) who don't understand the principles of AIs and haven't made decisions in their developments suddenly get announced to that our hard-earned skills and jobs can now be replaced by much less effort by an AI, in our confusion and subsequent reactions how can our sanity and senses of purpose be protected?

Are we, as societies, seriously considering the changes in laws to ensure our well-beings if human-intelligence or super-human intelligence AIs are with us, while this rush of technological advancement is developed among and by (in some cases) us? If AIs get very fast, if a harmful decision involving AI is made by only 1 company, the consequences could be also very quickly effected and wide-spread.

... ...

Technological development and participating in it could be very exciting, I empathise, but is our collective wisdom up-to-date with our collective, explosive cleverness? How much would our mistakes cost - are we doing all we can to make good decisions? Are we, contemporary societies of humans, ready for AI?

[fkinhelll]

A nice intro to a fascinating topic, appreciate it.

[kapanavi]

This is gonna be one of those videos in 30 years when we go like: "I can not believe that we were thinking like this"

[nights]

Thanks Andre, great talk. I dont agree that a type of singularity have happened before, a technical revolution in agriculture is a different thing. I agree that AI will foremost empower us for the next two or three decades, enabling us to do amazing things all virtually, including testing new drugs in seconds rather than years. But eventually I think we will come to the point of a self awareness, perhaps not as a consequence but obviously we will at some point replicate parts of the human brain as we have with every other organ. Self awareness is not the ultimate level of intelligence it's in our thalamo-cortical and we will understand every detail of that soon enough. I think its a bit naive to think that "we can control it because we made it", if a self-aware program (or whatever technology will be the host) can be launched or born on any device in the future by anyone pressing "execute", of course, then it will also be misused by bad interests. Want it or not, we will have this all in a couple of decades, there is certainly no stop button, and no one can predict what will happen as speed will pick up at an exponential rate. Just buckle up and try to enjoy the ride :-)

[kamautheodore]

awesome job!
i'm really excited to see how far A.I will go this year :)

[asianboy]

This guy's a bad speaker. Such an interesting subject though