Are we ready for AGI, and robot combination?

Artificial general intelligence AGI is one of the things that cause discussions. Somebody says that it releases low price people. But somebody says that the AGI causes very big problems. The fact is that all changes cause problems. If we want to use some new things, we must learn how to use them right. 

The AGI is a tool that can make many things. Or it should be that tool. 

We can say that AGI is a group of action modules around the LLM. And that makes it one of the most powerful things. 

The thing is that. Nobody knows the limits of modern LLM-based AIs. 

And that causes another thing, that we should think about.

Do we already have the AGI? We can collect almost every kind of action package around the LLMs. And the limit is that there should be a tool that can interact with the LLM. In the AGI model, the LLM takes the order. And then it transfers the mission to the module responsible for that action. 

If we want AI to cook food for us that tool requires an actor that operates in the physical world. The medium between computers and humans is robots. The man-shaped robot is one of the most interesting tools that we can imagine. That tool can affect society stronger than ever before. The LLM-based AI is not even five years old. And it started a revolution, especially in the ICT industry. So, what kind of revolution can the AI that controls robots in independent actions like cleaning? 

That means the requirement for calling things like robot vehicles to the door requires that the LLM has the socket that allows it to call robot vehicles. Or it must have a robot that takes the car. The human-looking robots are tools that can download any type of action package. And that makes those things act as chefs, cleaners, drivers, or anything that the user wants. 

But are we ready for those tools? The AGI is impressive. It learns faster than any human. The thing is that. This kind of system can revolutionize the world. The same robot that can act as a chef or cut our grass and drive our children home can operate as a merciless weapons. Those systems are dangerous in the wrong hands. The problem is that even if there are some kind of laws and other things that limit the AI use as a weapon controller those systems require very high-level data security. Things like organized crime can also use robots for their purposes. 

The thing that makes robots a powerful tool for the underworld is that those people can erase their memories. If we think the man-shaped robots that look some certain people, we face one problem. The problem is that some people can make full-size copies of bank managers. Those robots can walk in the banks. And then make money transactions for hackers. 

When we think about the first-person view robot, that looks like a human, we are facing one of the most interesting things. The hacker can operate that kind of robot using VR glasses and other input tools like data gloves. Then hackers can put that robot play things like cleaner. And when that robot slips in the office hackers can use it as a remote tool to control the computer. That is one of the illegal activities that this kind of robot can make. And those robots can also operate on the battlefield and cover operations. 

The strange notification of the name "Abraham"

The strange notification of the name "Abraham"

Are the parents of the persons who had the name "Abraham" got a more respective attitude for education than the average persons, or why there were so many remarkable persons in the list, where are persons, who had name Abraham as the given name? There are many respected monks, kings, and theologians on that list, which is taken from Wikipedia. 

I have thought that could the name "Abraham" mean that the person was somehow prepared for that work. The reason, why I see that thing like that is three famous "Abrahams" in history, and more remarkable persons, who had that name, but who were not so well known. And is that name mean that those people were trained or prepared for the work in an effective role for society. This kind of thing is really interesting when we are looking at those names on Wikipedia. 

The most famous "Abraham" was the grandfather of Hebrews, and that means that this name has been for the kings for giving them the honor. That thing is, of course, causing that there are many kings in history, who were using that name. And that would explain, why many "Abrahams" were great men. 

The second Abraham is, of course, Abraham Lincoln. The man, who ruled the USA during the Civil War. The thing is that this man was murdered, and the persons who made that thing were recognized and shot. But the thing is that nobody knows, is there some organization like ex-confederate officers, who wanted to punish Lincoln about the war. 

Third of those men, who carried the name Abraham is, in my opinion, Albert Abraham Michelson, the man who metered the speed of light. That man is not mentioned in the list of persons, who had Abraham as the given name. These kinds of things are really interesting. The thing that makes Michelson a very interesting person, that he succeeded in the metering the speed of light in the 19th. century, where was not even electric systems, and this thing made him the remarkable man. 

But as we know, in the list of persons, who had Abraham as the given name were lots of kings. Also, men of the church and other kinds of people are well represented. So is this coincidence? Or were the parents of those people just more able to get the training or education for those people? Were they more educated than average people. This thing makes that name interesting. So is the name "Abraham" only motivating, or is there something behind it? These kinds of questions are really interesting when we are researching that kind of thing. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_(given_name)

The industrial revolution and automatized manufacturing solutions

The industrial revolution and automatized manufacturing solutions

The problem with robots is that they are taking jobs, which are reserved for people, who have no education. The idea of robotics is the same with things like a spinner. The machine makes always job with the same quality, and it doesn't need the salary. This thing tempts the employers to choose robots to the jobs, which have reserved to uneducated people, and this is causing the problems.

If people would have too much free time that thing causes problems in the cities and the great number of unemployment causes things like riots and the rise of criminal activities. But if there are jobs only for highly educated people, that thing causes problems in many ways. The thing is that low education guarantees that the worker can be changed very easily, and there is always swapping person on the streets.

Salary of highly educated people is always better than a person, who has no education, and there would be no change for that kind of things. If the salary of highly educated people would get lower, that thing will touch also the highest level of the directors. And sometimes those people are also getting divorcement papers because they have done bad decisions.

The big salary is protecting their position. When we are thinking persons who are working in the service desks and other kinds of service places, we must realize, that this kind of people are needed the great language skills, and even in the time of Google translator would be needed to make official papers.

When we are thinking about the persons like congress translators, the quality of translation depends on the willing of the worker. Even if people like Engineers are getting a better salary than translators, language skills are very important in that profession. 

But let's go back to changes of structure in the working life. The robots are interesting tools because they don't need a salary, and the only thing, what they need is electricity. So the salary costs of the factory, which is working by using the robotics working force are very low. This means that the only costs are production materials, and actually, the contracts can be made that way, that the customer would deliver the materials to the production unit or factory, as normal people are saying those things.

That means that the profits what company gets are very high, or at least higher than the company, what uses the human workforce. In this case, the profits are flowing in the pockets of the factory owners, and that thing is capitalism in the tightest form. The thing is that the owners of factories get high profits because they own the machines like robots, which makes the job.

The same thing happened in the early years of the industrial revolution in the begin of the 19th century. The people who owned the land areas got very high incoming because the factory paid rent to them. And that is the base of the wealth modern high-class people, like Rockefellers. So the robotics is transferring the source of money one step lower from the owners of the land area. The robots can work with a very small crew and the CAM (Computer Aided Manufacturing) methods mean, that customers can bring own CAD drawings to the factory, and machines make the product.

Of course, those drawings and plans can send by using E-mail, which means that the production is extremely cheap, and the quality of the product is stable. Every each part of the produced merchandises goes through sensors, what are looking for errors, and if the error is found the piece will take off the line. That means that the customer can send the drawings to the factory and material order to another deliverer, what will send the material to the factory, and after a couple of weeks the products can deliver to the customer.

The game theory and the actions at the top level of society

 The game theory and the actions at the top level of society

By using short explanation the game theory is model, where every organism and actor in the universe are willing to maximize their benefit. In this text, the word "universe" means international and domestic politics, and also the economical universe, where the companies are acting. In the last environment, the companies are always calculating their benefit, before they are willing to buy or sell anything.

The signals, what company gives, when they are buying or selling things like other companies are important. If the company sells its production equipment, and it doesn't buy a new one, would that thing to tell that the company has economical problems. In the world of economics, companies are in a war, where the stocks and money are acting like ammunition.

Competition must be made by using legal methods, if some businessmen are caught from illegal actions, that would break the reputation of the company. But here we must understand that also one thing must be remembered when we are talking about companies and law. Military companies can operate for the governments in some areas, where sending regular troops would be a political hard decision.

That kind of things are the cases when some areas are swept or "cleaned" from hostile actors for things like oil business. That kind of operations would be made because the hostile actors wanted to deny to get the benefit from those natural resources. And in that case, the operation can be made by using mercenary soldiers, what keeps the shield of the government clean. The field operatives could be selected from the countries, which cannot be connected to the main actor, and that makes this kind of military "dirty business" very addictive. 

This is the idea of the theory, which is acting as a base in the thing, that is called as "economical and social Darwinism". In this version of Darwinistic evolution the companies and states, what is wealthy can survive. The rest of them are facing bankruptcy. The benefit of the state is a benefit to the leaders of the state, and this the thing in the gaming in economical and political areas. When the leaders of the state or companies are making alliances they are expecting to get something fro that alliance.

If we think things like games in stock marketing from the base of the game theory, the idea of those actions is to maximize the benefit of the companies, and when the companies have high profits and high standards, which means that the work has high quality, that would bring benefit especially for the leaders of the company. When we are thinking about the field of economics, we must realize that in the capitalistic model should the company have competitors. The competitor guarantees, that the company makes good work and this drops the not qualified operators out of the markets.

But the competitor guarantees also that the workers are making a good job. Because if the workers don't handle their jobs, the competitor would get the next job, and that is a really bad thing for the company. But the thing is that the leaders of the company can always get new jobs easily because the mistakes in the working area are made by the workers. Or at least this is the thing, what the leaders would say.

When we are thinking about political leadership, there are always people, who want to get points from the top. That means that those actors are always looking for the highest possible actor for supporting their benefit. This makes things like changing the constitution and the regalia of the state actors so difficult. The thing is that if the president has similar opinions as we have, that person has not too much regalia.

But when we are opposition for the president or head of the state or the president's decisions do not please us, we always want to change the constitution. This is the problem with leadership. If the leader is on our side, there is no problem with the power, what this person uses. This makes this kind of things so difficult. In the real world is always somebody, who tells everything to the boss, because that kind of things is bringing the benefit for that person's political career. 

When we are thinking about the benefit of political leaders, we must realize that those people are like "common leaders". They are making decisions about common things, and that saves them very often. They are not any special researchers or experts. And if somebody has some other opinions, they are saying that "would you come to make things on my place"?

There are many other decisions, what the politician must do, and that means that the thing, what might be dear for me, might be only one decision for that day. And this is the thing in politics. The mission of the politician is to share the limited resources of the state. During that thing, those persons must read the papers, what are brought in the front of them.

But sometimes politician must get publicity because those persons need votes when they are looking for the next season in the parliament or some other political institution. And in those cases, the politician might propose things, what are against that person's interest or benefit. In those cases, the politician can think that maybe somebody else would fall the suggestion, what would bring votes, but is against politicians personal benefit.