Some pretext:

Some pretext:

>Current economic model enabling businesses to gain increasing power politically
>Exponential growth of technology in every industry, fueled by said model
>Especially automation

Now, we've all heard and read about the inevitability of technology replacing most mundane jobs but...

>Technology becomes more efficient at decision making and competitive advantage analysis than humans
>more reliable
>Slowly replaces managers from front line all the way to high level
>Board of executives keep their self-interest in place and try to defend their seat atop an empire of super comepetitive technology
>Eventually board is absorbed

Meanwhile, the oligarch stage of the evolution of modern civilisation is in full swing due to the increasing power of organisations.

We are now slaves of super-powerful, super-wealthy, perhaps on the verge of singularity-like integrated mega-corps. Being programmed for competition, they continually improve to keep "market-share".

Is this how it will happen Cred Forums?

bullshit, but a nice change from apple and bts threads

Wow, that graph sure does make sense user

Decision making automation will be coded to emphasize utmost importance in:

>Competitive advantage
Innovation? - based on RBV theory for competitive advantage
>Resource efficiency
inevitability of all roles being automated?
>Asset protection
Earth? Also includes resource efficiency, removal of unprofitable or noncompetitive assets.
>Growth
Programmed by humans, using traditional business functions for growth, acquisition, mergers etc.


It will undoubtedly need to be an integrated unit, business strategy will need to be aligned across operations, just like traditional organisational structure.

It's arguable that most multinational enterprises (public business) incorporate stakeholder theory as the primary motivator for strategy formation.

Investing will also be automated, and the wealthiest entities being artificially controlled organisations, will mean that the shareholders for these public mega-corps will also be AI.

>organisations = australian?
>000
>POWLEES

Zero trips confirms

Role of humans you may ask?

Can be answered quite typically of our current role.

>Consuming
>Ensuring economic structure continues to empower corps


>This is impossible! We can't have 8 billion people without jobs

Oligarchy answer?

A guaranteed basic income

Why?

>ensure humans continue to fulfill their role of stimulating the economy and consuming products

>Oligarchy wants Universal Basic Income
Stooped reading there

Since our current monetary system is digital and tangibly worthless.
>receive guarrenteed income for being human
>Use money to pay for mortgage
>Use money to pay for food and necessities
>Use left over money to consume entertainment

The most successful organisations are those with the most power at this stage. This is due to their influence in influencing policy, particularly when and how much income the population will receive. This will allow them to create a universal "target consumer" based on income, tailored to their product/service line.

Care to explain your argument as to why in this case?

How can an oligarchy maintain power with 8 billion people unable to consume?

Don't forget that this is computer code, interests are stated above, based on traditional business models. Humans don't play a role in this any longer.

You mean i will be paid to buy chinkpads and mechanical keyboards? Sign me up

This graph seems to have labelled the same lines multiple times.

Can somebody translate it to autism for me?

>that motherfucking fucking feeling when doing research in AI and machine learning
>tmffw I see all these miserable high end engineers struggling to complete a degree which will soon be obsolete due to a neural network that I can program while sipping green tea
>tmffw they laughed at me for picking AI as a master's specialization

It's over, I welcome our new AI overlords which will call me Father.
I love my new god complex.

Nice thread OP

So why did you label the same line twice?

based on OP's theory though, your role will also be considered worthless, you'll just contribute to the rise.

I gotchu anons

didn't think this was necessary for this board but thank you

then again this is autism central so i guess it was my mistake

After the singularity, sure.
That is if we can't eventually hardcode unconditional love for their creator inside the AI, anyway. But that's still 50-something years from now.

Ralistically, I can easily see all types of analysts, who are paid to engineer models, be replaced by ML algortihms in the next 20 years or so.
I can't really convey how cool this stuff is through a mongolian knitting bulletin board, but trust me if i tell you that it's really impressive.
Check out wavenet and get back at me...

what's your research topic atm?

Mostly deep learning, and some reinforcement learning.
Gonna move to transfer learning soon for my master's thesis, hopefully: professors in my country are egoistic pieces of shit so you never know what they'll do to fuck you up.

I did a project with this one guy who basically traded me an A on a course for my work, and then used my code to get a research grant of 50k without even citing me.

Shit I just realized I'm blogposting like fuck, sorry anons

No doubt higher-ups already use some pretty advanced modelling to influence decision making. Something like the super high frequency trading some stock-trading companies do competes companies that don't use it out of the market.

Only the right one makes sense to me. (Left sounds like gibberish)

And I think it's misleading. Humans are less capable of dealing with complexity unaided because the complexity of our problems has gone up.

The problems are solving today are as complicated to the human with technology as the problems we used to solve without technology.

Even if machines replace all normal jobs they'll still come up with bullshit jobs you have to do in order to guarantee this basic income. No one wants a population that does nothing productive with their time. Personally, I think many people would go crazy without a job of some sort.

>Personally, I think many people would go crazy without a job of some sort.
You've clearly never met a NEET.

I could imagine doing what I do now for the rest of my life
>playing around with hardware
>writing, using and contributing to free software
>consuming and producing media
>shitposting and chatting online

No job-induced “sanity” required.

This entire thread, and the only responses are those about not having to work.

This board truly is just neckbeards

if you can't comprehend the left graph then you have no understanding of business nor competition

I already knew that before you told me, but thanks

how

If you have no knowledge on a topic then why do you criticize a graph?

I didn't? I refrained from commenting on it. I commented on the right, which deals with technology and problem solving, areas with which I am familiar.