Learn about the GrabCAD Platform
Get to know GrabCAD as an open software platform for Additive Manufacturing
Visit our new homepage
Could it be that we are close to the day when AI will make improvements to our 3D design?
More like take over engineering jobs... The AI architects will be the ones with a job.
In non-critical areas of design, AI will easily replace humans. But it seems to me that not everything is so simple. I think, for now, AI will be like a gadget for solving routine tasks.
I will add one more thought. I think that with the use of AI, people will be able to create colossal projects. Let's say to create an airplane at home. If AI will make models and drawings, then we will have time to think about onboard systems, the shape of the fuselage, and so on...
AI can also make possible for that model plane to last one flight, and you will not have control over it.
That's why I say - AI will work in non-critical areas of design. At the beginning ;)
If you look at areas like generative design (additive manufacturing), you're already pretty much there. Choose the controlling elements; interfacing features, materials, bounding geometry, FEA (loads, constraints etc), CFD requirements and the system will create the geometry. Already being used quite a lot in the aerospace industry for weight reduction.
Right now, we're working with a lot of topology manually.. but I can see a lot of that going to AI as well as the software evolves. Will it matter to the entire industry? Not right away... but as costs come down, you'll see these techniques, somewhat unique to aerospace, f1, etc., make their way into more industry sectors.
Also... lattice structure generation for osteointegration has been a thing for some time now. Use to do a lot of this manually.. which is somewhat painstaking and now, it's all handled with a few clicks and choices of lattice types.
https://youtu.be/ca44x5t2SZU
I think that we are in a historical moment, as people facing AI, similar to the one we have gone through in many other situations in which "some type of artifact", potentially very useful, created by ourselves, curiously "seemed to threaten our presence and relevance in the world".
I suppose that when the first agricultural machines appeared, with their potential advantages, some could see and appreciate them. But "for a time" others took pains to highlight their defects, reflecting a certain fear of "being replaced."
Of course, this terrifying possibility struck farm workers closely, but not other humans, so society was not shaken by this change. In the big cities they were delighted to receive more and better products (without worrying about the loss of jobs in the fields).
The same thing happened in the industry with the first automations, whose potential some visionaries saw, but whose "transitory" defects took pains to point out to those who saw themselves threatened in their jobs.
The list could be very long, including teachers' fears of being replaced by machine learning systems, draftsman´s being replaced by CADD, and other "developments that affect specific groups of people society". If we are not in those groups, the problem does not seem to exist!
The difference now is that the AI threatens us all... including its own creators, since it has the potential to create other AI's and/or modify itself.
I think this feeling of "threat of being replaced" will also be temporary and that the time will come when we put into proper perspective everything that AI (or any other future technology) can provide us with. Of course, society will undergo many changes to make that possible... and not all of them will be pleasant. What is inexorable is that "we will be replaced by other humans" who will define the course of society in another way. That is, the act of "assimilation and adaptation to the new" depends, to a large extent, on "new humans" (children, grandchildren) who will take the lead in those decisions and not on us (who live, well or badly, " the transition").
Here is an example of how AI imperceptibly enters our lives. I even forgot about the aerospace industry and the fact that I once used similar systems for weight/load optimization, shape and density optimization in my old projects. I perceive these tools as a "must have".
As Marcelo says, in the past the advent of the computer was enormous for all technologies, the digital gigantic for technology and a revolutionary social impact, for AI the technological impact is already on the way socially in the future close will be dantesque to this desire to add a cultural impact (even a revolution). All areas will be affected, even maintenance will be self-sufficient, it will be necessary to redefine the very notion of work = salary...
Until now were always some humans on the side of the winner. This time is different. I'm convinced that all participants to this discussion are smart enough to picture what could happen if some AI will take over.
The last book of Frank Schätzing (The tyrrany of the butterfly/Die Tyrranei des Schmetterlings) describes very good how such a scenario could look like. To make it short "we will be obsolete". Like Marcelo said, the ones who can be replaced will be replaced. How will this look like in a world where "we" are always at least one step behind the "machine" and the "machine" will decide who is worth to "waste" resources?
Our problem is that somewhere where the decissions will be taken is always some old greedy guy who lives that far away from the reality that he can't get how devastating is the mess that he will cause with such a decision. And a lot of youn ones without any clue of the real life they will see some Messiah in him and will blindly follow.
Hush, hush...! Calm down. Take a deep breath. Think about something delicious, about a warm bed. For example, think about a comfortable cage in the zoo. Next to all our ancestors. We didn't exterminate all the monkeys, did we? That's why we will exist, but not in the leading roles.
Great discussion and nice points. A very vague/general take on this subject https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU from over 8 years ago. I still believe AI won't have complete control. Human intervention will be required. The level of skill that an "engineer" has currently may not enough to keep up. As the AI expands, this skill gap will also be increased and hence will need new set of engineers who will a different kind of work but will still be the AI's Masters. That's my humble opinion.
:D :D :D Thanks for comforting me! I agree with Solid Tweaks and disagree with Frank Schätzing because what a AI would need it's the spark, the idea, and that's something that even our brain needed several millions of years to get ignited. Some could say "ok but a quantum computer could run billions simultaneous simulations of ways to solve a problem". In fact the humans from the very first use of a stick or a stone as a tool are doing the same, with a far more powerful computer, our brain. However, my answer to the initial question in this discussion is "yes, AI-assisted CAD will help us to make better parts and devices" and like Sig Erso said this is happening already even if it's something rather rudimentary right now but this is part of a evolution and it will take some time to become "mature".
Considering that the current crop of AI's only take about 15 seconds of web browsing to decide that the human race is a virus needing to be wiped out, we probably shouldn't hand them the keys just yet... ;)
NO!! Don't think so....AI is what humans put into it, and can you put in experience?? out of the box thinking?? Improve a desing from learning from failures and incorporate these failures into something new....(that is how the greatest inventions are made....Guiness, post it, super glue, etc, etc...
Well, this is not such a simple or definitive question.
Someone could say that humans are also what other humans put inside of us (in our mother's womb, at home, at school, and in the experiences that we have to experience).
In addition, our brain still retains many mysteries, but we know that if we gather about 1000 neurons we can have the functionality of the brain of a mosquito, with about 13,000 for a jellyfish, with 250,000 for an ant, with 2,200,000 for a dog. .. and the list continues until we have about 86,000,000,000. And each of the human neurons has the capacity to connect with another 10,000 to build circuits (and knowledge) that respond "flexibly" to environmental stimuli.
What I'm trying to show is that the human brain is not magical (or intelligence, creativity, emotions... or anything) but that it is the result of "interconnectivity on a huge scale" and that "gives us the appearance" of spontaneity , personality and many other things that arise from the "propagation of small changes in our stimuli".
You won't find two really identical people, because there are trillions upon trillions of possibilities resulting from connecting all our neurons (which is much more predictable in a simple organism, which only needs a few hundred).
Neural networks mimic some of this "biological" reality...and when they get enough "volume and computational power" they will have human-like responses. And that includes "what we believe to be intelligence and creativity" (which I have been studying from psychology and neuroscience for many years).
You have to be open to what arises and act accordingly!
You are right with the key, that's what I mean with becoming mature. I had this answer long before the first PC existed only by watching and reading what is happening around us. This is not something new, only now it's much more visible as before. However, maturity is for me to look for more than the very simple answer for complicated questions.
I love this discussion. Finally a discussion that's worth to be part of it. Thank you.
Exactly Hans! This is the way most AIs work, by experience and learning failure / success, even new concepts also appear with subjectivity and "maybe", a step closer to autonomous creativity, reminding us that we We are only at the beginning of this revolution (no one can predict what the different AIs will be like in 50 years) when we know that in the 1940s the computer did not exist and 50 years later the majority of households ( in rich countries of course) had it.
You can see an interesting sample of what I was saying (invaluable collaboration to solve problems) in this article:
The most capable humans on the planet reached a point that was easily surpassed by a creation of the humans themselves (the AI). That is what it is about, that our creations "exceed us in capacity" but that does not imply that they "dominate us". We will always have control, this cannot be delegated:
We won't be so stupid as not to give ourselves a chance to regain control...
"We will always have control" I guess my question is "who" is we?
I trust the AI concerns of Elon Musk over Bill Gates, who have shown little concern for humanity.
"We" refers to the human race which, as always and in all species, is made up of "the fittest to survive"... and that has nothing to do with kindness or good intentions, unfortunately.
P.S.: I'm not a proponent of AI or anything like that. But I recognize in this technology "a chance to spread knowledge" in humanity and, perhaps, achieve the positive changes that are always enunciated when speaking of the "knowledge revolution" or, its counterpart, the "slavery of ignorance".
This "we" is in fact our problem. Each nation is looking for itself and doesn't really care about the others. That's what it leads us to the "(in)famous" dark place and also the way how "we" would use a AI. How would right now in this world someone teach a AI that "we" are the good ones and the "others" are the bad ones.
If we aren't able to understand the ethics needed to live in peace toghether, how can we teach a AI what's good and what's wrong?
But this is probably something to discuss in another discussion.
It is very true. In the end, the problem is always the man and it is an "indivisible/inseparable" problem. If you look at it on a global scale, it is expressed between countries. If you look at it at the country level, it is expressed between groups (political, social, religious). If you look at it at the group level, it is expressed among its members. If you look at it at the family level, it is expressed between relatives. Finally, if you look at it on a personal level, you will notice it within each one of us.
Man can only give different versions to an AI about what is right or wrong, because he is not clear about it. They are not "absolute" concepts but "socially agreed" and, therefore, geographically and temporally variable. What some human groups consider correct may be an atrocity for others (the death penalty, the carrying of weapons, abortion, euthanasia, etc.). Globalization has "short-circuited" these regional agreements... but it is not for this reason that a global agreement is easily reached.
You're also right that this may be the subject of another discussion.
From a recent interview with Geoffrey Hinton (considered the Godfather of machine learning).
Reporter: Are we close to computers coming up with their own ideas for improving themselves?
Hinton: Yes we might be.
Reporter: And then it could just go... fast.
Hinton: That's an issue yes, we need to think hard about how to control that.
Reporter: Yeah, can we?
Hinton: We don't know, we haven't been there yet but we can try...
I've read this a few times, just to make sure I fully understand what you're saying, while also taking into account that English may not be a first language, hence the translation of "survival of the fittest".. but nothing in evolution bears any of this out.
Cooperation is the cornerstone of a society's ability to survive and there have been many mechanisms employed to ensure that. Don't need to get into those, because some would no doubt create a scandal and really throw this conversation on a tangent.
But... "kindness" and "good intentions" are certainly part of building cooperation thus, ensuring survival by banding together for common causes. We see it all the time in the modern world. Not sure where this takes us on the subject of AI... so maybe we've already segued away from the main topic.
From THIS moment I understood the weakness of my flesh, it disgusted me. I craved the strength and certainty of steel. I aspired to the purity of the Blessed Machine. Your kind cling to your flesh, as though it will not decay and fail you. One day the crude biomass you call the temple will wither, and you will beg my kind to save you. But I am already saved, for the Machine is immortal… Even in death I serve the Omnissiah.
Some wise words from Eliezer Shlomo Yudkowsky: Pausing AI Developments Isn't Enough. We Need to Shut it All Down
welcome to brave new world.
In fact, I think AI will inevitably replace human beings,the future may be worse than brave new world
hi,
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is making significant inroads in the field of Computer-Aided Design (CAD) software, offering several benefits and applications. Here are some ways AI is being integrated into CAD software:
Sincerely,
thanks
If you don't receive the email within an hour (and you've checked your Spam folder), email us as confirmation@grabcad.com.
