View Full Version : tPF Robots are coming for your job
Human workers of all stripes pound the table claiming desperately that they're irreplaceable. Bus drivers. Bartenders. Financial advisors. Speechwriters. Firefighters. Umpires. Even doctors and surgeons. Meanwhile, corporations and investors are spending billions — at least $8.5 billion last year on AI, and $1.8 billion on robots — toward making all those jobs replaceable. Why? Simply put, robots and computers don't need healthcare, pensions, vacation days or even salaries.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-wright-robots-jobs-data-mining-20160328-story.html
michiganFats
03-28-2016, 10:03 AM
I'm not worried.
I'm not worried.
Really? what do you do for a living?
michiganFats
03-28-2016, 10:08 AM
Really? what do you do for a living?
I'm not telling you. Historically automation is a boon. It's good for us.
leekohler2
03-28-2016, 10:12 AM
Really? what do you do for a living?
What are you going to do? Kill the robots? This story is as old as the industrial revolution. Should we halt progress?
Cigar
03-28-2016, 10:14 AM
Good, they can help my Wife do the spring yard cleaning while I watch the Game.
What are you going to do? Kill the robots? This story is as old as the industrial revolution. Should we halt progress?
Are you volunteering to starve?
michiganFats
03-28-2016, 10:21 AM
Good, they can help my Wife do the spring yard cleaning while I watch the Game.
you've got the right idea about this.
Mac-7
03-28-2016, 10:27 AM
What are you going to do? Kill the robots? This story is as old as the industrial revolution. Should we halt progress?
Libs will tax the companies that make the robots and give that money to deadbeat obama voters
I'm not telling you.
Why not?
leekohler2
03-28-2016, 10:30 AM
Are you volunteering to starve?
This is what people say anytime there is progress. People will find new jobs to do. Change is the only constant in life. Change or die.
Libs will tax the companies that make the robots and give that money to deadbeat obama voters
Oh shut up. :rollseyes:
What are you going to do? Kill the robots? This story is as old as the industrial revolution. Should we halt progress?
You should realize that I am in favor of automation and robots. What I am not in favor of is the politicians and the rugged individualists who are clueless about the fallout from the transition.
Machine-gunning mobs of starving unemployed is not the optimal solution. And no, at some point (already reached in some sectors) the jobs created by automation and robots will be less than the number of jobs destroyed. Education/retraining is linear; technology is exponential. This is not a repeat of the industrial Revolution.
This is what people say anytime there is progress. People will find new jobs to do. Change is the only constant in life. Change or die.
No, they eventually will not find new jobs.
Oh shut up. :rollseyes:
Agreed.
Mac-7
03-28-2016, 10:35 AM
This is what people say anytime there is progress. People will find new jobs to do. Change is the only constant in life. Change or die.
Progress is making millions of workers unemployed?
If you and the other doomsayers are correct people will not find other jobs that pay as well.
Mac-7
03-28-2016, 10:37 AM
Agreed.
That makes sense because the only way for losers like you and leekholer2 to win an argument to silence the opposition.
leekohler2
03-28-2016, 10:37 AM
No, they eventually will not find new jobs.
Of course they will.
Progress is making millions of workers unemployed?
If you and the other doomsayers are correct people will not find other jobs that pay as well.
I'm not the doomsayer. Do you ever read my posts, or do you just spew BS?
I don't live in fear. If I see change coming, I prepare myself for it.
Mark III
03-28-2016, 11:08 AM
Comments on articles such as this one are always a whistling past the graveyard.
The profit motive will inexorably demand more automation which will produce higher and higher unemployment and "entitlements" . It is not "if" as much as when.
Some form of socialism will become the socio-political system. This is all inevitable. I think the real question is, will the world then be a dreary place?
Is the future utopian or dystopic?
leekohler2
03-28-2016, 11:09 AM
Comments on articles such as this one are always a whistling past the graveyard.
The profit motive will inexorably demand more automation which will produce higher and higher unemployment and "entitlements" . If is not "if" as much as when.
Some form of socialism will become the socio-political system. This is all inevitable. I think the real question is, will the world then be a dreary place?
Is the future utopian or dystopic?
Hopefully it'll be like Star Trek.
Chris
03-28-2016, 11:22 AM
I was told a decade ago foreigners were coming for my job. I'm still waiting for that scare to occur. Robots, LOL.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLKUkTjITrA
I agree with they guy I can't talk to, automation has historically been a boon, it has replaced menial labor, reduced production costs, which savings go to innovation, innovation that creates new jobs.
Peter1469
03-28-2016, 12:54 PM
I suspect most who get replaced by robots are to blame. Failure to plan for the future.
Chris
03-28-2016, 01:08 PM
I suspect most who get replaced by robots are to blame. Failure to plan for the future.
It's hard to predict the future but you need to keep up with the latest advances in your field.
Mini Me
03-28-2016, 02:07 PM
You should realize that I am in favor of automation and robots. What I am not in favor of is the politicians and the rugged individualists who are clueless about the fallout from the transition.
Machine-gunning mobs of starving unemployed is not the optimal solution. And no, at some point (already reached in some sectors) the jobs created by automation and robots will be less than the number of jobs destroyed. Education/retraining is linear; technology is exponential. This is not a repeat of the industrial Revolution.
No worry! We have millions of plastic coffins ready at the Fema camps ready to accomodate all the unemployables! And there are jobs fighting the Muslim Zombies in the ME, that need to be filled with IED fodder!
michiganFats
03-28-2016, 02:12 PM
Why not?
Nunya ;P
Mini Me
03-28-2016, 02:12 PM
I was told a decade ago foreigners were coming for my job. I'm still waiting for that scare to occur. Robots, LOL.<br>
<br>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLKUkTjITrA<br>
<br><strong>Oh, like the millions of IT jobs that went to India? It is ASTOUNDING how often you are so wrong!<br>
</strong><br>
I agree with they guy I can't talk to, automation has historically been a boon, it has replaced menial labor, reduced production costs, which savings go to innovation, innovation that creates new jobs.<br><br><strong>Rage Against the machine!</strong><br>
<br>
Chris
03-28-2016, 02:34 PM
<br><br><strong>Rage Against the machine!</strong><br>
<br>
On forum that's
Rage Against the machine!
My job is to spend my savings, Social Security and pension before I die. My job is to enjoy everyday of my life as long as I can. When they create a machine that can replace that I'll just open the thing up and throw my shoes into its gears.:laugh:
Progress is making millions of workers unemployed?
If you and the other doomsayers are correct people will not find other jobs that pay as well.
If we are right, then they won't find other jobs, period.
But I wouldn't call myself a doomsayer, Mac. I just think that we are "gonna live in some interesting times" before we clear out the philosophical deadwood, reach Singularity, and usher in a Golden Age. (There's a huge fly in the ointment there, but it's not relevant right this moment.)
If you have any spare cash lying around, you might like to buy stock in guillotine manufacturers. I'm predicting a bull market for them.
My job is to spend my savings, Social Security and pension before I die. My job is to enjoy everyday of my life as long as I can. When they create a machine that can replace that I'll just open the thing up and throw my shoes into its gears.:laugh:
But what if that machine is designed to be an immortal Avatar for your intelligence, your personality, your soul?
Consider the progression of the existential states of matter:
1) cold clay or metal suffers from random events done to it, and is unrepairable except by accident.
2) our Ship-of-Thesis flesh, though made of much the same molecules, is self-repairing to an extent.
3) our metal machines exist and flourish because we repair them... and are beginning to build self-repair functions into them, as well.
The next step in human evolution may well be the merging of metal and meat. Our distant, immortal, and god-like descendants will look back at us and wonder...
Chris
03-28-2016, 04:10 PM
But what if that machine is designed to be an immortal Avatar for your intelligence, your personality, your soul?
Consider the progression of the existential states of matter:
1) cold clay or metal suffers from random events done to it, and is unrepairable except by accident.
2) our Ship-of-Thesis flesh, though made of much the same molecules, is self-repairing to an extent.
3) our metal machines exist and flourish because we repair them... and are beginning to build self-repair functions into them, as well.
The next step in human evolution may well be the merging of metal and meat. Our distant, immortal, and god-like descendants will look back at us and wonder...
Our distant, immortal, and god-like descendants will look back at us and wonder...
God-like?
"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." Genesis 1:26
See where you got that from?
God-like?
"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." Genesis 1:26
See where you got that from?
Just because an ancient con job document uses the same word I do does not mean that the concept I use arises from the ancient con job document. That's really primitive magical thinking there, Chris. Just as with the word and concept of "marriage", the word and concept of "gods" was around well before either Christianity or Judaism.
Arthur C. Clark said it best: Clarke's third law - Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Imagine a world where nano-sized avatars ride the air currents like gnats and can instantly come together at a thought to perform work of whatever complexity is desired. Every concept in that sentence exists now, as separate technology. All that is needed is the will, a little tie-together theory, and "mere engineering" to make it a reality.
Peter1469
03-28-2016, 05:07 PM
Just because an ancient con job document uses the same word I do does not mean that the concept I use arises from the ancient con job document. That's really primitive magical thinking there, Chris. Just as with the word and concept of "marriage", the word and concept of "gods" was around well before either Christianity or Judaism.
Arthur C. Clark said it best: Clarke's third law - Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Imagine a world where nano-sized avatars ride the air currents like gnats and can instantly come together at a thought to perform work of whatever complexity is desired. Every concept in that sentence exists now, as separate technology. All that is needed is the will, a little tie-together theory, and "mere engineering" to make it a reality.Robots will take the jobs of religious people.
All of them.
Chris
03-28-2016, 05:36 PM
Just because an ancient con job document uses the same word I do does not mean that the concept I use arises from the ancient con job document. That's really primitive magical thinking there, Chris. Just as with the word and concept of "marriage", the word and concept of "gods" was around well before either Christianity or Judaism.
Arthur C. Clark said it best: Clarke's third law - Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Imagine a world where nano-sized avatars ride the air currents like gnats and can instantly come together at a thought to perform work of whatever complexity is desired. Every concept in that sentence exists now, as separate technology. All that is needed is the will, a little tie-together theory, and "mere engineering" to make it a reality.
Not my problem you don't know where your idea derive form.
Mac-7
03-28-2016, 06:23 PM
If we are right, then they won't find other jobs, period.
But I wouldn't call myself a doomsayer, Mac. I just think that we are "gonna live in some interesting times" before we clear out the philosophical deadwood, reach Singularity, and usher in a Golden Age. (There's a huge fly in the ointment there, but it's not relevant right this moment.)
If you have any spare cash lying around, you might like to buy stock in guillotine manufacturers. I'm predicting a bull market for them.
I guess the great unwashed left expects to be paid even if they dont work.
it is convienent that the parts of our society that dont really want jobs cant wait for the robots to get here
but that is far in the future
today the too-to-work crowd are busy kerping the border with mexico open and the flow of illegal aliens flowing
Archer0915
03-28-2016, 08:03 PM
Human workers of all stripes pound the table claiming desperately that they're irreplaceable. Bus drivers. Bartenders. Financial advisors. Speechwriters. Firefighters. Umpires. Even doctors and surgeons. Meanwhile, corporations and investors are spending billions — at least $8.5 billion last year on AI, and $1.8 billion on robots — toward making all those jobs replaceable. Why? Simply put, robots and computers don't need healthcare, pensions, vacation days or even salaries.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-wright-robots-jobs-data-mining-20160328-story.html
Automation is really the only option. A company just can not afford to keep lumping on more and more expenses. So we automate! This means that only highly skilled and highly motivated people will have employment as we continue to offshore and downsize to cut costs. The eutopia many ferr trades dream of is just that, a dream.
This does not mean that they are dead wrong about their theory, the application where government comes in is the issue.
I guess the great unwashed left expects to be paid even if they dont work.
If there are no jobs (assume for a moment that that comes to pass), then what would you suggest as an alternative? Kill the excess "useless eaters"? If not genocide, then what? Just let them starve? Feed them? what?
(I am asking you to answer a hypothetical. Scenarios and simulations deal with hypothetical issues all the time. Since quite a few very smart people think that this hypothetical actually has a chance of coming true, it is a fair question, used to gauge how open you are to what alternatives.)
it is convienent that the parts of our society that dont really want jobs cant wait for the robots to get here
Can't speak for others, Mac, but I'm retired. I put in my 50+ years of hard work.
but that is far in the future
Famous last words. Technology is exponential. Remember the legend of the rice on the chessboard? One grain on the first square, two on the second, and so forth: 1,2,4,8,16...
Please watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjHIylzrS7E
today the too-to-work crowd are busy kerping the border with mexico open and the flow of illegal aliens flowing
That's just fine by me. I don't know what or who they are, but they sound like weirdos. Too-to people kerping the border? Sounds kinky. Keep 'em away from me.
Automation is really the only option. A company just can not afford to keep lumping on more and more expenses. So we automate! This means that only highly skilled and highly motivated people will have employment as we continue to offshore and downsize to cut costs. The eutopia many ferr trades dream of is just that, a dream.
This does not mean that they are dead wrong about their theory, the application where government comes in is the issue.
IF permanent obsolescence and joblessness come to pass THEN there will be only two broad options that various people (in positions to accomplish them) will consider:
1) Kill off the excess population. Enact, in effect, the Georgia Guidestones recommendations. Automation and robots means that the One Percent (there has always been a One Percent) will finally be able to do away with those pesky, unreliable, dirty, sneaky, and savage slaves/serfs/wageslaves/human resources. And a global population of 500 million is more than sufficient for economy-of-scale automated production.
I have a sneaking suspicion that the 7.5 billion expendables will be, largely, Brown People.
2) Streamline the existing insanity of welfare programs into a single BGI system. Funding for this would be, initially, additional taxes on the employed and the companies that are automating. As automation and robotics drive down labor costs to near zero, I think that some variant of C.H. Douglas's Social Credit scheme would be put in place, where the BGI is "fiat" (i.e.: printed) money whose inflationary effects exactly counter the natural deflationary effects of economy-of-scale automated production. (See the links in my sig on this.)
Included in the above will be a huge move of bodies (and minds) into education, pure research, the arts, games and gaming, and so forth. Done right, a FARP economy will be the underpinning of a private enterprise based renaissance society.
I see no other options than the above two scenarios. Oh, wait, we can also destroy all the machines, issue all the ditch diggers handmade spoons to dig with (full employment!), and start living in Ayn Rand's Anthem society.
Hiding one's head in the dirt and screaming that it will never happen because it has never happened in the past is not a rational option.
Peter1469
03-28-2016, 09:51 PM
When everything is automated, then why can't basic needs to provided cheaply to all?
Archer0915
03-28-2016, 10:00 PM
When everything is automated, they why can't basic needs to provided cheaply to all?
Greed! Simply put, some people will not be satisfied with what they have and if they can not work to get it, they will steal to get it.
Chris
03-29-2016, 08:39 AM
When everything is automated, then why can't basic needs to provided cheaply to all?
I don't think you can decouple the fear automation will replace all jobs from the Marxist prediction of a post-scarcity society where everyone takes what they want from the heap. Robots will keep the heap full.
Mac-7
03-29-2016, 09:18 AM
I don't think you can decouple the fear automation will replace all jobs from the Marxist prediction of a post-scarcity society where everyone takes what they want from the heap.
Robots will keep the heap full.
Then why keep the border open so that our robots have to feed more deadbeats from mexico than necessary?
close the border, keep the mexicans in mexico and make mexican robots feed the mexicans.
Mark III
03-29-2016, 09:27 AM
The factor that I see being left out of these scenarios is the demand for more profit.
Stockholders demand MORE profit. Automation promises more profit.
It is nice to say we will take part of the increased productivity that comes from automation and use it to provide a basic sustenance income to all , but that runs smack into the profit motive. Will owners and stockholders accept paying people not to work at the factory, in lieu of paying themselves not to work at the factory because they own stock in the company?
Without the disconnection of the profit motive as the be all end all of business how can the world get to the point where this "utopia" begins?
Chris
03-29-2016, 09:32 AM
The factor that I see being left out of these scenarios is the demand for more profit.
Stockholders demand MORE profit. Automation promises more profit.
It is nice to say we will take part of the increased productivity that comes from automation and use it to provide a basic sustenance income to all , but that runs smack into the profit motive. Will owners and stockholders accept paying people not to work at the factory, in lieu of paying themselves not to work at the factory because they own stock in the company?
Without the disconnection of the profit motive as the be all end all of business how can the world get to the point where this "utopia" begins?
I agree. This won't happen unless people can profit from it. Yes, automation can reduce production costs and increase profits but you still must be able to provide what people want for them to buy it. Guess what, if automation takes all the jobs, then no one works and no one earns wages and no one can purchase anything. The iron laws of supply and demand cannot be broken. It won't happen. Thanks for bringing profit up!
Chris
03-29-2016, 09:36 AM
Then why keep the border open so that our robots have to feed more deadbeats from mexico than necessary?
close the border, keep the mexicans in mexico and make mexican robots feed the mexicans.
:blob5:
Mac-7
03-29-2016, 09:39 AM
:blob5:
You did not answer the question.
but thats understandable since you support the open border with mexico that brings in unneeded prople that we have to support.
Chris
03-29-2016, 09:42 AM
You did not answer the question.
but thats understandable since you support the open border with mexico that brings in unneeded prople that we have to support.
Question to whacky to answer.
I support a strictly private property solution to immigration, remember? Keep up.
I don't think you can decouple the fear automation will replace all jobs from the Marxist prediction of a post-scarcity society where everyone takes what they want from the heap. Robots will keep the heap full.
Muddy thinkers keep harping on Marx, and attempting to link Marx with "pipe dreams" of post-scarcity economics. In actuality, Marx:
"believed capitalism contained within it certain tendencies which countered increasing automation and prevented it from developing beyond a limited point, so that manual industrial labor could not be eliminated until the overthrow of capitalism. Some commentators on Marx have argued that at the time he wrote the Grundrisse, he thought that the collapse of capitalism due to advancing automation was inevitable despite these counter-tendencies, but that by the time of his major work Capital: Critique of Political Economy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital:_Critique_of_Political_Economy) he had abandoned this view, and came to believe that capitalism could continually renew itself unless overthrown."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-scarcity_economy
In other words, Marx was a "useful idiot," yet screaming "ZOMG MARXISM" is still the go-to response of industrial-age ostriches to the increasingly-apparent fact that CAPITALISM (or at least Capitalistic forces within the framework of a semi-fascist political-economic system) is rapidly eliminating LABOR as the third leg of economic development.
Carry on.
Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RepRap_project
Chris
03-29-2016, 11:03 AM
Muddy thinkers keep harping on Marx, and attempting to link Marx with "pipe dreams" of post-scarcity economics. In actuality, Marx:
"believed capitalism contained within it certain tendencies which countered increasing automation and prevented it from developing beyond a limited point, so that manual industrial labor could not be eliminated until the overthrow of capitalism. Some commentators on Marx have argued that at the time he wrote the Grundrisse, he thought that the collapse of capitalism due to advancing automation was inevitable despite these counter-tendencies, but that by the time of his major work Capital: Critique of Political Economy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital:_Critique_of_Political_Economy) he had abandoned this view, and came to believe that capitalism could continually renew itself unless overthrown."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-scarcity_economy
In other words, Marx was a "useful idiot," yet screaming "ZOMG MARXISM" is still the go-to response of industrial-age ostriches to the increasingly-apparent fact that CAPITALISM (or at least Capitalistic forces within the framework of a semi-fascist political-economic system) is rapidly eliminating LABOR as the third leg of economic development.
Carry on.
Marx was an idiot, so? Setting aside tjat ad hom, my argument still stands. In order for automation/robots to replace all jobs, you will need to realize a post-scarcity society. Won't happen. Wishful thinking.
I agree. This won't happen unless people can profit from it. Yes, automation can reduce production costs and increase profits but you still must be able to provide what people want for them to buy it. Guess what, if automation takes all the jobs, then no one works and no one earns wages and no one can purchase anything. The iron laws of supply and demand cannot be broken. It won't happen. Thanks for bringing profit up!
Chris, that is precisely the point that people are worried about. There are three factors at play:
Individual myopia:
The "creative destruction" of job replacement in a free market economy has never been, and never will be, a smooth transition. A free market economy necessarily "breaks" things temporarily. "Things" being: job stability, careers, families, etc. That is the nature of change. And a free market economy can ABSORB a certain amount of this creative destruction without breaking. But pile on the changes too quickly and you run the risk of breaking the system.
Every individual entrepreneur is concerned (rightly) with only his/her own bottom line. A free enterprise society works when each "player" works to maximize their own profit. But this creates a certain amount of myopia or blindness to the overall effects when most or all businesses are competing to rapidly automate, and thus reduce their labor costs, and thus gain economic advantage over their competitors.
In other words, the system can absorb a certain amount of job loss. Beyond a certain point, however, the job loss creates a situation where the very people who create the job losses through their automating are harmed. But by then, doing something about it may be too little too late.
Education and Re-Training:
As has been said many times, and is obvious to most people, learning is a linear process. But technology is exponential in nature. This new industrial revolution is replacing brains, in addition to muscle. The slope of education and re-training is therefore steeper. It is all very well to sit in one's Ivory Tower and pontificate that "people will just have to go back to school and learn new, automation and robot related trades." Those long haul truckers, delivery drivers and bus drivers just have to learn new trades. Really? With the $100,000 they've socked away in their education accounts? And we can't have the government pay for it, nosireebob! That's socialism!
Numbers:
People who sat at benches and made buggy whips were not a huge percentage of the population. Ditto for candlemakers. Farmers were a major percentage, but the replacement jobs for displaced farmers were well within the scope of their work talents.
But now, within the next few years, there are millions of industrial workers who are under threat of losing their jobs, and the replacement jobs for them require much more re-training and education that the jobs that ex-farmers did. Imagine an Industrial Revolution where drudgery assembly line jobs did not exist to fill that gap, but instead there was a demand for accountants and surgeons? Yep, I can clearly see millions of farmers making that transition.
How does creative destruction work when it affects - all at the same time - a significant part of your economy?
Bottom line:
People are not going to go calming into that good night. Either something gets done to address this situation or, as the Chinese would say, there will be interesting times ahead.
Marx was an idiot, so? Setting aside tjat ad hom, my argument still stands.
Pretty much. When does ad hom become fact? When it is obvious that the man missed the entire point. The Labor Theory of Value is an ideological set piece that ignores the fact that Capital and Finance are also based on labor. Everything of economic value in this world consists of the expenditure of labor. Marx myopically looked at labor as only applying to "the workers." Yeah, Marx was an idiot.
In order for automation/robots to replace all jobs, you will need to realize a post-scarcity society. Won't happen. Wishful thinking.
Economic change does not happen in an "A then B" order. Thoughtful minds recognize that. Why do you insist that they do not recognize that? To try and make your point?
Chris
03-29-2016, 12:41 PM
Pretty much. When does ad hom become fact? When it is obvious that the man missed the entire point. The Labor Theory of Value is an ideological set piece that ignores the fact that Capital and Finance are also based on labor. Everything of economic value in this world consists of the expenditure of labor. Marx myopically looked at labor as only applying to "the workers." Yeah, Marx was an idiot.
Economic change does not happen in an "A then B" order. Thoughtful minds recognize that. Why do you insist that they do not recognize that? To try and make your point?
My point has nothing to do with ordered events. It simply points out the impossibility of robots taking all jobs. One, they will never be a post-scarcity society. Two, as I argued with Mark, there must be profits and there cannot be with full automation. And that doesn't even look at, three, the fact that historically automation has led to more investment in innovation that demands more jobs. There's no "A then B" there in any of those three points.
Chris
03-29-2016, 12:43 PM
Chris, that is precisely the point that people are worried about. There are three factors at play:
Individual myopia:
The "creative destruction" of job replacement in a free market economy has never been, and never will be, a smooth transition. A free market economy necessarily "breaks" things temporarily. "Things" being: job stability, careers, families, etc. That is the nature of change. And a free market economy can ABSORB a certain amount of this creative destruction without breaking. But pile on the changes too quickly and you run the risk of breaking the system.
Every individual entrepreneur is concerned (rightly) with only his/her own bottom line. A free enterprise society works when each "player" works to maximize their own profit. But this creates a certain amount of myopia or blindness to the overall effects when most or all businesses are competing to rapidly automate, and thus reduce their labor costs, and thus gain economic advantage over their competitors.
In other words, the system can absorb a certain amount of job loss. Beyond a certain point, however, the job loss creates a situation where the very people who create the job losses through their automating are harmed. But by then, doing something about it may be too little too late.
Education and Re-Training:
As has been said many times, and is obvious to most people, learning is a linear process. But technology is exponential in nature. This new industrial revolution is replacing brains, in addition to muscle. The slope of education and re-training is therefore steeper. It is all very well to sit in one's Ivory Tower and pontificate that "people will just have to go back to school and learn new, automation and robot related trades." Those long haul truckers, delivery drivers and bus drivers just have to learn new trades. Really? With the $100,000 they've socked away in their education accounts? And we can't have the government pay for it, nosireebob! That's socialism!
Numbers:
People who sat at benches and made buggy whips were not a huge percentage of the population. Ditto for candlemakers. Farmers were a major percentage, but the replacement jobs for displaced farmers were well within the scope of their work talents.
But now, within the next few years, there are millions of industrial workers who are under threat of losing their jobs, and the replacement jobs for them require much more re-training and education that the jobs that ex-farmers did. Imagine an Industrial Revolution where drudgery assembly line jobs did not exist to fill that gap, but instead there was a demand for accountants and surgeons? Yep, I can clearly see millions of farmers making that transition.
How does creative destruction work when it affects - all at the same time - a significant part of your economy?
Bottom line:
People are not going to go calming into that good night. Either something gets done to address this situation or, as the Chinese would say, there will be interesting times ahead.
Except that is a reason why work will never be fully automated. We will reach a point of diminishing returns on investment in automation.
I agree. This won't happen unless people can profit from it. Yes, automation can reduce production costs and increase profits but you still must be able to provide what people want for them to buy it. Guess what, if automation takes all the jobs, then no one works and no one earns wages and no one can purchase anything. The iron laws of supply and demand cannot be broken. It won't happen. Thanks for bringing profit up!
You have an interesting mental process there, Chris.
(a) One the one hand, you assert categorically that there never will be total automation, since automation has historically always created more jobs than it replaced.
(b) Yet, above, you say that if automation takes all the jobs, then no one will have any money to buy the stuff the robots are making.
The assumptions underlying (a) and (b) are mutually exclusive. So which is it, Chris? It sure sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too. If you accept the first point, then you cannot use it's opposite to argue the second. And if you accept the second point, you are obviously accepting the possibility of total automation.
This is classic Orwellian Doublethink, by the way. O'Brien wound be proud.
Except that is a reason why work will never be fully automated. We will reach a point of diminishing returns on investment in automation.
Your statement contradicts itself. Any return on investment measure is based, ultimately, on the cost of someone's labor. And if robots are doing the upgrades to more efficient automation, since robots don't get paid, their work is cost free. ROI becomes, therefore, an obsolete and non-operative measurement.
Check your premises.
My point has nothing to do with ordered events. It simply points out the impossibility of robots taking all jobs. One, they will never be a post-scarcity society. Two, as I argued with Mark, there must be profits and there cannot be with full automation. And that doesn't even look at, three, the fact that historically automation has led to more investment in innovation that demands more jobs. There's no "A then B" there in any of those three points.
See my other responses, above.
Like talking to a friggin' stalk of celery....
Chris
03-29-2016, 01:10 PM
See my other responses, above.
Like talking to a friggin' stalk of celery....
Thanks for insult. When you can address the three points I made rationally, give me a mentions, otherwise this is a waste of time.
Thanks for insult. When you can address the three points I made rationally, give me a mentions, otherwise this is a waste of time.
Aw shucks, my bad. I gave you an excuse to run away.
Answer my doublethink point above.
Chris
03-29-2016, 01:21 PM
Your statement contradicts itself. Any return on investment measure is based, ultimately, on the cost of someone's labor. And if robots are doing the upgrades to more efficient automation, since robots don't get paid, their work is cost free. ROI becomes, therefore, an obsolete and non-operative measurement.
Check your premises.
Before I go let me point out you reference to Marx's labor theory of value: "Any return on investment measure is based, ultimately, on the cost of someone's labor." That theory was debunked long ago. Oh, but you don't argue Marx! LOL.
ROI becomes, therefore, an obsolete and non-operative measurement.
It reaches a point of diminishing returns, drops in value, approaching zero, yes. But that was my argument. :f_doh:
Now I leave you to wallow in your insults.
Before I go let me point out you reference to Marx's labor theory of value: "Any return on investment measure is based, ultimately, on the cost of someone's labor." That theory was debunked long ago. Oh, but you don't argue Marx! LOL.
Debunked? Really? Pray tell me, what then is ROI based on? Take it step by step, kid.
It reaches a point of diminishing returns, drops in value, approaching zero, yes. But that was my argument.
Your error is thinking that that ROI approaching zero will THEN be important. Circular thinking, Chris. When ROI becomes an obsolete measurement tool (because there IS no investment cost!) then other desirability criteria come into play. Such things as: do I want this? Is it pretty? Whatever. Literally any value criteria other than money.
Mini Me
03-29-2016, 04:09 PM
Except that is a reason why work will never be fully automated. We will reach a point of diminishing returns on investment in automation.
That point is always germane! When so few people have jobs anymore, the markets will be destroyed, as no one can afford to buy anything, besides the autocrats. Already, we see this happening with the race to the bottom!The Chinese/WalMart model is failing!
Workers must be declared an endangered species!And people will revolt and destroy these machines, as it should be!
Chris
03-29-2016, 04:14 PM
That point is always germane! When so few people have jobs anymore, the markets will be destroyed, as no one can afford to buy anything, besides the autocrats. Already, we see this happening with the race to the bottom!The Chinese/WalMart model is failing!
Workers must be declared an endangered species!And people will revolt and destroy these machines, as it should be!
The autocrats can't buy unless they make a profit, which they won't. These alarmist imaginings by some are just impossible situations.
decedent
03-29-2016, 04:18 PM
I've been prepared for the robot revolution, clenching my sphincter for a year now. How much longer do I need to wait?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdQceIJ-t-M
I've been prepared for the robot revolution, clenching my sphincter for a year now. How much longer do I need to wait?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdQceIJ-t-M
i don't know, but clenched sphincter would be a great name for a band
Subdermal
03-29-2016, 04:25 PM
I've been prepared for the robot revolution, clenching my sphincter for a year now. How much longer do I need to wait?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdQceIJ-t-M
Don't worry. They aren't going to replace your sphincter with a robot. Maybe one of the far left posters here instead...
Mini Me
03-29-2016, 04:33 PM
I suspect most who get replaced by robots are to blame. Failure to plan for the future.
Conservative claptrap! "Blame the victim!"
Peter1469
03-29-2016, 04:55 PM
I don't think you can decouple the fear automation will replace all jobs from the Marxist prediction of a post-scarcity society where everyone takes what they want from the heap. Robots will keep the heap full.
Right. We have had this conversation several times over the last year and that position has been advanced by members and with reputable articles. I don't think that we are there yet. But we will get there.
Peter1469
03-29-2016, 04:57 PM
Conservative claptrap! "Blame the victim!"
Why?
Chris
03-29-2016, 05:51 PM
Right. We have had this conversation several times over the last year and that position has been advanced by members and with reputable articles. I don't think that we are there yet. But we will get there.
That is the only way it could happen, though I don't see it as possible. Who knows.
donttread
03-29-2016, 05:57 PM
Human workers of all stripes pound the table claiming desperately that they're irreplaceable. Bus drivers. Bartenders. Financial advisors. Speechwriters. Firefighters. Umpires. Even doctors and surgeons. Meanwhile, corporations and investors are spending billions — at least $8.5 billion last year on AI, and $1.8 billion on robots — toward making all those jobs replaceable. Why? Simply put, robots and computers don't need healthcare, pensions, vacation days or even salaries.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-wright-robots-jobs-data-mining-20160328-story.html
Where are the Fem Bots we were promised by science!
Mini Me
03-29-2016, 10:40 PM
Why?
Go back and read your opinion, then think about what I said.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.