1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:03,204
(Toby Walsh) I wanna talk 
about artificial intelligence: it's --

2
00:00:03,674 --> 00:00:05,089
I'm a professor of artificial intelligence

3
00:00:05,089 --> 00:00:09,271
and its a great time, 2015, 
to be working in AI.

4
00:00:09,544 --> 00:00:10,544
We're making real palpable progress

5
00:00:10,544 --> 00:00:12,820
and there's loads of money 
being thrown at us.

6
00:00:12,820 --> 00:00:17,000
Google just spent 
five hundred million dollars --

7
00:00:17,000 --> 00:00:21,989
pounds buying an AI startup called Deep Mind a couple of weeks ago,

8
00:00:21,989 --> 00:00:25,172
today they announced that they were 
going to spend a billion dollars

9
00:00:25,671 --> 00:00:28,469
setting up an AI lab in Silicon Valley.

10
00:00:29,001 --> 00:00:31,591
IBM is betting about 
a third of the company

11
00:00:31,830 --> 00:00:34,858
on their cognitive AI computing effort.

12
00:00:35,084 --> 00:00:38,216
So it's really interesting time to be working in AI.

13
00:00:38,631 --> 00:00:41,782
But the first thing I wanted to 
help inform you about

14
00:00:42,250 --> 00:00:46,792
is what is the state of art, 
what progress have we made in AI

15
00:00:46,792 --> 00:00:51,187
because Hollywood paints 
all these pictures,

16
00:00:51,187 --> 00:00:53,488
these mostly dystopian pictures of AI.

17
00:00:53,495 --> 00:00:58,672
Whenever the next science fiction movie
comes out, I put my head in my hands

18
00:00:58,672 --> 00:01:01,755
and think Oh my God, what do people think
that we're doing?

19
00:01:01,755 --> 00:01:08,729
So, I wanted to start by just giving you
a feel for what actually is really capable.

20
00:01:09,081 --> 00:01:13,872
So a couple of years ago, IBM Watson
won the game show Jeopardy 1,

21
00:01:13,872 --> 00:01:19,737
the million dollar prize in the game show,
Jeopardy P, the reigning human champions.

22
00:01:19,737 --> 00:01:23,357
Now, you might think, well that's just
a party trick, isn't it?

23
00:01:23,357 --> 00:01:27,625
It's a -- pour enough of Wikipedia 
and the internet into a computer,

24
00:01:27,625 --> 00:01:30,543
and it can answer general knowledge
questions.

25
00:01:30,543 --> 00:01:33,204
Well, you guys are being a bit unfair to
IBM Watson,

26
00:01:33,204 --> 00:01:35,881
there are the cryptic questions
they are answering.

27
00:01:35,881 --> 00:01:40,878
But just to give you a real feel for 
what is technically possible today,

28
00:01:40,878 --> 00:01:43,586
something that was announced
just two days ago:

29
00:01:43,834 --> 00:01:51,869
some colleagues of mine at NII in Japan
passed the University Entrance Exam

30
00:01:51,869 --> 00:01:53,433
with an AI program.

31
00:01:53,433 --> 00:01:56,326
Now, I thought long and hard about
putting up a page of maths.

32
00:01:56,326 --> 00:01:58,007
I thought, well, I'm going to get --

33
00:01:58,007 --> 00:02:00,007
half of the audience is going to 
leave immediately

34
00:02:00,007 --> 00:02:01,354
if I put up a page of math

35
00:02:01,354 --> 00:02:03,133
But I wanted you to see, just to feel

36
00:02:03,962 --> 00:02:07,403
the depth of questions 
that they were answering.

37
00:02:07,403 --> 00:02:11,507
So this is from the maths paper, you know,
a non trivial, sort of,

38
00:02:11,507 --> 00:02:15,148
if you come from the UK, 
A-level-like math question

39
00:02:15,148 --> 00:02:16,468
that they were able to answer

40
00:02:17,272 --> 00:02:21,889
Here is a physics question
about Newtonian dynamics

41
00:02:21,889 --> 00:02:23,552
that they were able to answer.

42
00:02:23,552 --> 00:02:28,545
Now they got 511 points, out of
a maximum of 950.

43
00:02:28,939 --> 00:02:32,391
That's more than the average score
of Japanese students

44
00:02:32,391 --> 00:02:34,007
sitting the entrance exam.

45
00:02:34,007 --> 00:02:38,542
They would have got into most 
Japanese universities with a score of 511.

46
00:02:38,908 --> 00:02:40,621
That's what's possible today.

47
00:02:40,621 --> 00:02:44,134
Their ambition in 10 years' time is to get
into Tokyo, University of Tokyo,

48
00:02:44,134 --> 00:02:46,434
which is one of the best universities
in the world.

49
00:02:48,488 --> 00:02:50,475
So, this is why I put up 
a picture of Terminator,

50
00:02:50,475 --> 00:02:53,468
because whenever I talk to the media
about what we do in AI,

51
00:02:53,476 --> 00:02:55,769
they put up a picture of Terminator,
right?

52
00:02:55,769 --> 00:02:58,098
So I don't want you to worry 
about Terminator,

53
00:02:58,098 --> 00:03:02,117
Terminator is at least 
50 to 100 years away.

54
00:03:02,582 --> 00:03:05,985
and there are lots of reasons why
we don't have to worry about it,

55
00:03:05,985 --> 00:03:07,248
about Terminator.

56
00:03:07,248 --> 00:03:08,979
I'm not going to go and spend
too much time

57
00:03:08,979 --> 00:03:11,348
on why you don't have to worry about Terminator.

58
00:03:11,676 --> 00:03:13,334
But there is actually things 
that you should worry about,

59
00:03:13,334 --> 00:03:15,352
much nearer than Terminator.

60
00:03:17,007 --> 00:03:20,160
Many people have said, 
Stephen Hawkins has said

61
00:03:20,160 --> 00:03:22,713
that, you know, AI is going to spell
the end of the human race.

62
00:03:23,295 --> 00:03:27,961
Elon Musk chimed in afterwards, said
"It's our biggest existential threat."

63
00:03:29,793 --> 00:03:32,841
Bill Gates followed on by saying,
"Elon Musk was right."

64
00:03:33,498 --> 00:03:39,519
Lots of people have said that's a --
AI is a real existential threat to us.

65
00:03:39,519 --> 00:03:42,887
I don't want you to worry about
the existential threat that AI

66
00:03:42,887 --> 00:03:44,900
or Terminator is going to bring.

67
00:03:45,953 --> 00:03:47,711
There's actually a very common confusion,

68
00:03:48,121 --> 00:03:51,139
which is that it's not the AI 
that's going to be the existential threat,

69
00:03:51,139 --> 00:03:52,139
it's autonomy, it's autonomous systems.

70
00:03:54,386 --> 00:03:56,042
What's in the (check) --

71
00:03:56,042 --> 00:03:57,972
it isn't it going to wake up 
any time in the morning and say:

72
00:03:57,972 --> 00:04:02,109
"You know what? I'm tired 
of playing Jeopardy,

73
00:04:02,109 --> 00:04:04,173
"I want to play Who Wants to Be a Millionaire!

74
00:04:05,299 --> 00:04:07,468
"Or wait a second, I'm tired of playing 
game shows,

75
00:04:07,468 --> 00:04:09,393
I want to take over the universe."

76
00:04:09,821 --> 00:04:12,195
It's just not in its code, there is no way,

77
00:04:12,195 --> 00:04:15,065
it's not given any freedom to think 
about anything other

78
00:04:15,065 --> 00:04:17,000
than maximizing its Jeopardy score.

79
00:04:18,219 --> 00:04:21,209
And it has no desires, no other desires than,

80
00:04:21,228 --> 00:04:23,482
other to improve its maximum scores.

81
00:04:23,482 --> 00:04:26,256
So I don't want you to worry about Terminator,

82
00:04:27,350 --> 00:04:29,102
but I do want you to worry about jobs.

83
00:04:29,974 --> 00:04:32,166
Because lots of people, 
lots of very serious people,

84
00:04:32,166 --> 00:04:35,076
have been saying 
hat AI is going to end jobs,

85
00:04:35,076 --> 00:04:38,157
and that is a very great consequence 
for anyone working in education,

86
00:04:38,157 --> 00:04:42,269
because, certainly, the jobs that are going 
to exist in the future

87
00:04:42,269 --> 00:04:44,925
are going to be different 
than the jobs that exist today.

88
00:04:46,880 --> 00:04:49,724
Now, who has an odd birthday?

89
00:04:51,251 --> 00:04:52,938
Well, I haven't told you 
what an odd birthday is yet,

90
00:04:52,938 --> 00:04:54,990
so someone has an odd birthday, like me.

91
00:04:54,990 --> 00:04:57,858
OK. Who was born on an odd-number 
day of the month?

92
00:04:57,858 --> 00:04:59,995
I was born on the 11th of April, right?

93
00:05:00,824 --> 00:05:03,368
Come on, it's half the room, 
I know it's half the room.

94
00:05:03,368 --> 00:05:04,923
(Laughter)

95
00:05:04,923 --> 00:05:08,690
OK.Well, you want to have 
an odd birthday, by the way,

96
00:05:09,059 --> 00:05:12,504
because that means, in 20 years' time, 
you will be a person with a job.

97
00:05:13,426 --> 00:05:16,277
As opposed to the even people, 
who won't have jobs.

98
00:05:16,277 --> 00:05:20,662
That's certainty -- if you believe 
lots of serious people,

99
00:05:22,141 --> 00:05:25,010
you might have missed this news 
on Friday the 13th,

100
00:05:25,010 --> 00:05:27,778
I thought this was a rather
depressing news story

101
00:05:27,778 --> 00:05:29,748
....... (check) comparison otherwise ...... (check)

102
00:05:29,777 --> 00:05:31,527
but the chief economist, Bank of England,

103
00:05:31,922 --> 00:05:36,230
went on the record saying 50% of jobs 
were under threat in the UK.

104
00:05:36,948 --> 00:05:40,420
And he's not the first serious person
who should know what he's talking about

105
00:05:40,420 --> 00:05:42,736
who said similar things.

106
00:05:43,029 --> 00:05:46,255
There was a very influential Merrill Lynch
report that came out a month or to ago

107
00:05:46,270 --> 00:05:49,430
saying very similar things about 
the impact of AI,

108
00:05:49,430 --> 00:05:51,375
robotics, automation on jobs.

109
00:05:53,439 --> 00:05:56,278
And some of this goes back to, I think, 
one of the first reports

110
00:05:56,278 --> 00:05:59,288
that really hit the press, 
that really got people's attention,

111
00:05:59,288 --> 00:06:02,075
was a report that came out of 
the Oxford Martin School.

112
00:06:02,075 --> 00:06:05,702
They predicted that 47% of jobs 
in the United States

113
00:06:06,110 --> 00:06:08,550
were under threat of automation 
in the next 20 years.

114
00:06:10,234 --> 00:06:13,594
We followed that up 
with a very similar study and analysis

115
00:06:13,880 --> 00:06:15,961
for jobs in Australia, where I work.

116
00:06:16,865 --> 00:06:19,323
And because it's a slightly different 
profile of workers,

117
00:06:19,323 --> 00:06:24,329
of the work force in Australia, we came up
with a number of around 40%.

118
00:06:24,329 --> 00:06:27,129
These are non trivial numbers, right? 
40-50%.

119
00:06:27,589 --> 00:06:32,497
No, just an aside: 47%, I don't know 
why they didn't say 47.2%, right?

120
00:06:32,497 --> 00:06:35,551
You can't believe a number 
that's far too precise

121
00:06:35,551 --> 00:06:37,842
when you're predicting the future,
but nevertheless,

122
00:06:37,842 --> 00:06:39,532
the fact that it's of this sort of scale,

123
00:06:39,532 --> 00:06:44,601
you've got to take away: it wasn't 4%, 
it was roughly about half the jobs.

124
00:06:47,784 --> 00:06:50,495
Now, let's put some context to this.

125
00:06:50,495 --> 00:06:52,413
I mean, is this really a credible claim?

126
00:06:52,413 --> 00:06:55,549
The Number One job 
in the United States today: truck driver.

127
00:06:55,962 --> 00:06:57,526
Now you might have noticed,

128
00:06:57,536 --> 00:07:00,079
the autonomous cars
are coming to us very soon.

129
00:07:00,506 --> 00:07:03,579
We're going to be having -- tried
the first trial of autonomous cars

130
00:07:03,579 --> 00:07:06,760
on the roads, public roads of Australia, 
three weeks ago.

131
00:07:07,371 --> 00:07:09,657
The Google Car has driven 
over a million kilometers

132
00:07:09,657 --> 00:07:12,542
-- or the Google cars, rather, 
have driven over a million kilometers,

133
00:07:12,907 --> 00:07:15,050
autonomously, on the roads of California.

134
00:07:15,893 --> 00:07:18,553
In 20 years' time, we are going to have 
autonomous cars.

135
00:07:18,553 --> 00:07:20,255
We're also going to have 
autonomous trucks.

136
00:07:21,033 --> 00:07:24,769
So if you are in the Number One profession
in the United States,

137
00:07:24,769 --> 00:07:28,480
you have to worry that your job 
is not going to be automated away.

138
00:07:29,712 --> 00:07:32,494
The Number Two job in the United States 
is salesperson.

139
00:07:33,343 --> 00:07:36,248
Again, since we use the internet,

140
00:07:36,248 --> 00:07:39,618
we've actually mostly automated 
that process ourselves,

141
00:07:39,618 --> 00:07:43,382
but it's clear that a lot of those jobs 
are going to be disappearing.

142
00:07:43,382 --> 00:07:46,736
So I think these claims 
have a lot of credibility.

143
00:07:48,896 --> 00:07:53,104
There's actually a nice dinner party game 
that my colleagues in AI play

144
00:07:53,104 --> 00:07:55,736
at the end of our conferences,
where we sit around

145
00:07:55,736 --> 00:07:58,250
and the game is, you have to name a job

146
00:07:59,115 --> 00:08:02,671
and then, someone has to put up 
some credible evidence

147
00:08:02,671 --> 00:08:05,748
that we're actually well on the way 
to actually automating that.

148
00:08:05,748 --> 00:08:08,152
And this game is almost impossible to win.

149
00:08:08,737 --> 00:08:10,423
If I had more time, 
I'd play the game with you.

150
00:08:11,293 --> 00:08:15,260
The only -- about the only winning answer
is politician.

151
00:08:15,650 --> 00:08:17,931
(Laughter)

152
00:08:17,931 --> 00:08:20,747
They will certainly regulate that
they'll be the last to be automated.

153
00:08:20,747 --> 00:08:22,731
But that's about 
the only winning answer we have.

154
00:08:24,049 --> 00:08:28,836
So -- and it's not just technology 
that is the cause of this.

155
00:08:28,836 --> 00:08:33,035
There's many other, really, 
sort of rather unhelpful trends.

156
00:08:33,035 --> 00:08:35,558
If you were trying to set up 
the world's economy,

157
00:08:35,558 --> 00:08:38,842
you would not put these things 
all down on the table at the same time:

158
00:08:38,842 --> 00:08:40,825
the global, 
ongoing global financial crisis,

159
00:08:40,825 --> 00:08:43,840
which seems like 
it will never disappear, I think;

160
00:08:44,755 --> 00:08:48,013
the fact that we're all living longer: 
this is great, great news for us

161
00:08:48,013 --> 00:08:50,333
but bad news for employment;

162
00:08:50,961 --> 00:08:54,425
the impact of globalization, the fact that 
we can outsource our work

163
00:08:54,425 --> 00:08:56,191
to cheaper economies.

164
00:08:56,191 --> 00:09:00,191
All of these things 
are compounding the impact

165
00:09:00,191 --> 00:09:02,957
that technology is having 
on the nature of work.

166
00:09:04,749 --> 00:09:09,725
And this transformation is going to be 
different than the last one,

167
00:09:09,725 --> 00:09:11,357
the Industrial revolution.

168
00:09:12,021 --> 00:09:15,591
There's no hard and fast 
rule of economics that says:

169
00:09:16,911 --> 00:09:20,039
"As many jobs need to be created 
by a new technology as destroyed."

170
00:09:20,039 --> 00:09:22,952
Every time we have a new technology, 
of course, new jobs are created.

171
00:09:22,952 --> 00:09:25,883
There's lots of, there's thousands, 
hundreds of thousands of new jobs

172
00:09:26,204 --> 00:09:27,848
enabled by technology today.

173
00:09:28,355 --> 00:09:32,484
But there's no reason that they have to 
balance exactly those that are destroyed.

174
00:09:33,092 --> 00:09:36,199
In the last -- in the last revolution, 
that did happen to be the case.

175
00:09:36,853 --> 00:09:40,930
A third of the population was working 
out in the fields, in agriculture.

176
00:09:40,930 --> 00:09:44,552
Now, worldwide, 
it's 3 or 4% of the world's population

177
00:09:44,552 --> 00:09:45,657
working in agriculture.

178
00:09:45,657 --> 00:09:48,029
Those people are working 
in factories and offices now.

179
00:09:48,029 --> 00:09:51,920
We employ far more people than we did 
at the turn of the 19th century.

180
00:09:52,629 --> 00:09:55,993
But this one looks different, this 
information revolution looks different.

181
00:09:55,993 --> 00:10:00,233
It looks like it has the potential 
to take away more jobs, perhaps,

182
00:10:00,233 --> 00:10:01,529
than it does.

183
00:10:01,529 --> 00:10:03,684
And one of the other things is that 
we used to think

184
00:10:03,684 --> 00:10:05,293
it was the blue-collar jobs.

185
00:10:06,509 --> 00:10:10,937
And that's true: if you go 
to a car factory today, sure enough,

186
00:10:10,937 --> 00:10:12,578
there are robots 
that are doing the painting,

187
00:10:12,578 --> 00:10:14,800
there are robots 
that are doing the welding.

188
00:10:14,800 --> 00:10:16,584
But nowadays, it's white-collar jobs:

189
00:10:16,584 --> 00:10:20,006
it's journalists, it's lawyers, 
it's accountants,

190
00:10:20,006 --> 00:10:21,667
these jobs that are under threat.

191
00:10:21,667 --> 00:10:25,444
These graphs here show 
the percentage change in employment

192
00:10:25,444 --> 00:10:31,244
and the change in employment rates.

193
00:10:31,660 --> 00:10:34,672
And it's the middle, the middle class, 
white-collar professions

194
00:10:34,672 --> 00:10:37,923
that we thought that you would go 
to university to make yourself safe,

195
00:10:37,926 --> 00:10:40,624
but it seems to be the ones 
that are most under threat.

196
99:59:59,999 --> 99:59:59,999
If you are a ....... (check) it's probably -- you're too cheap to be replaced by something automated. But if you're a more expensive person, and this means (check) that the rich are getting richer and inequalities that we are seeing in society that are distressing our societies to day, seem to be magnified by these technological changes. And there is so many frightening graphs, if you're going to read Thomas Picketty (check), I encourage you. Go and look at one of his books, and you can see here that we're seeing a constant improvement in productivity. Technology is buying us those improvements in productivity, is increasing our wealth. But there's a leveling off of employment. And so, the challenge, then, is how -- it's a question for society, not for a technologist like myself -- how do we all benefit from this rising tide, not so that it is the rich get richer and the rest of us get further behind. So, many parts of many jobs looks likely (check) to be automated. One confusion is this: people say these jobs are going to disappear. Actually, it seems to be more likely that many parts of your job will be automated. But that still means that there is perhaps less employment around. So how can you make yourself more future-proof? Well, I have two pieces of advice as a technologist, in terms of what's going to be technically possible in AI. Either you've got to embrace the future, so become like me, become someone who's working on trying to invent that future. And if you're not technically minded, that's fine: I've got the other part of the equation, the other answer to your question which is completely at the other end of the spectrum, which is: focus on those things that find as AI, the hardest things, making a future that's more creative, making a future that can understand your emotional state, focusing on emotional terms and not intellectual intelligence. 12:23