Automation and AI will require a fundamental rethinking of politics, especially by conservatives (1 Viewer)

[adonis]

If you're thinking about how AI is going to affect people on the other side of the political aisle, you're not thinking anywhere near big enough.  AI and nanotechnology have the potential to more or less completely solve the fundamental economic problem of scarcity, which is really the thing that drives almost every form of social organization for the past several thousand years.  They also have the potential to drive humanity to extinction.  The outcome of this process, at least at some point, isn't likely to be a slightly-more-blue or slightly-more-red version of the status quo. 

Yeah, it's going to disrupt almost everything and bring in new threats.

I thought that this aspect was the most accessible at the current time, especially with the national debate on healthcare and entitlement reform still pretty fresh, where many on the right closely link a person's value to society with how productive they are.  Certainly agree that the potential impact of all of this doesn't stop there by any means.

I think people will look back and be able to put the starting point of this shift several years ago, and while it may not feel that we're deep into it right now, it seems relatively clear that we're on the automation spectrum...even though many folks believe it's a problem of the future.  It's a problem now, and we've only scratched the surface of its disruptive capabilities.

 

[adonis]

Great topic. I can't comment too much on how AI and automation will change society because I'm not educated enough to do so, and based on some of the disagreements in here it's difficult to predict anyhow. 

But here is what I DO know: the OP lectures us that we need to change our thinking, especially conservatives. History shows again and again that society doesn't work that way. We will change only when forced to, by crisis and catastrophe. 

I think that's a bit too cynical.  Folks can have their views changed, especially by a charismatic leader who can effectively communicate the problem.  The bad part is that most of our leaders aren't doing a good job of diagnosing the issues and proposing changes.  If we wait for the crisis to change, it'll likely be too late.  

This topic is just meant to encourage conversation on this topic and to get feedback.  I know I've changed my mind on issues based on conversation and not crisis.  Maybe there are others out there who can as well.

 

[adonis]

For every automatable activity, there has to be code to automate that activity.  To be the person that writes the code that enables code to self-write and self-test seems to be the ideal place to be.  Fear of automation is a boogeyman.  Embrace your fear.

The real issues is that many of the folks whose jobs will be replaced by automation are low skill, low education employees.  I agree that writing code is the place to be for the near future, or other highly skilled, highly specialized fields....but for most of the folks being replaced, that's not an option.  You can't expect to retrain all the truck drivers to be computer programmers.

And that's the real issue here.  Where will they go?  To the plants that have been automated as well?  To the warehouses that have been automated?  Automation targets repetitive, low skill jobs.  

Perhaps some % of them can be retrained and upgrade their skillsets moving them up on the skills ladder, but a huge % won't be.  And what will that do to our public concept of value?  Our personal concepts of value, tied to work?  Entitlements with requirements that you must work in order to deserve them.

Our society is in for all kinds of changes, but one of the things that seems inevitable is that we're going to have to struggle with whether a person is deserving of basic human care - food, shelter, healthcare, etc - merely by being a citizen in our country, and not based on the value that they offer to our country in terms of producing valued goods and services.

 

[adonis]

And at first, they'll come for the low-skilled, low-education jobs.  Those are the low hanging fruits of automation.  

But when you combine automation and AI, you can start going after the higher skill jobs.  There are few jobs that given a sufficiently advanced AI and robots, that can't be replaced by a machine that does the job better, faster, cheaper, and doesn't need breaks.

So as more and more people are pushed out of being able to find work...how do we as a society respond?  How are we going to be required to reshape our values?  Our politics?  

It's an interesting question to me.  More interesting that just talking about AI and automation and some of the risks inherent to the technologies themselves....

 

[BassNBrew]

As someone who was a die hard conservative for most of my life, I saw the direction you are going with this convo about 10 years ago. I used to believe in the American Dream, but now I see it exists only for those born with exceptional talents. If you were not born with exceptional skills at what you can accomplish, then what you can accomplish is nothing more than a commodity, as there are literally millions who can accomplish what you can accomplish. And one will never achieve the American Dream producing commodity level accomplishment. Now historically speaking, that's been okay for the 240 years of our country, as for most people the commodity price for what they can accomplish has been able to provide basic standards of living as they hold on to the belief in the American Dream. But there is also a chunk of society who no matter how hard they try will produce accomplishment that isn't even worth the commodity price. Without regulation the market would naturally pay them so little that they couldn't even afford a basic standard of living, because they exist so abundantly in the market that they are literally "a dime a dozen". Thus we have regulation, such as minimum wage, such that the market does not exploit their desperation. The conversations regarding this have been long and deep, yet without solution, because so many are die hard conservatives like I was with my eyes closed. But I began to see a bigger problem, which is the direction you are going with this convo. And that is, as automation and AI increase, it creates less and less opportunity for one to be exceptional. That means less and less people achieving the American Dream. Now, the economists will say, that's okay, they'll just fall to the commodity labor market. They'll be fine as the commodity price for their labor will provide for their needs. But while that is true financially speaking, it ignores one great part of humanity that makes us distinctly human... and that is hope. The problem our future suffers from is that hope is dying. Less and less people believe they can achieve the American Dream, because they are just waking up to reality. They can't achieve it, no matter how hard they try. Yet they witness the rich, and their lives, and see the separation between themselves and the rich.... which historically speaking when this separation grows bigger and bigger in society, it has always resulted in revolution. As more and more people get pushed from exceptionalism to commodity, which will push more people from commodity to sub-commodity (minimum wage protection), we inch closer and closer to revolution every day. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0TdGGpOpVE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMYNfQlf1H8

We already have/had revolution as exhibited by the rise of Bernie and Trump.

 

[Politician Spock]

We already have/had revolution as exhibited by the rise of Bernie and Trump.

I agree. Revolutions don't just happen overnight. The motivation behind them heats up over time. Bernie, Trump, Occupy Wall Street, etc, etc.... these are all just signs that the heat is increasing. Eventually the heat reaches a tipping point.

 

[BassNBrew]

And at first, they'll come for the low-skilled, low-education jobs.  Those are the low hanging fruits of automation.  

But when you combine automation and AI, you can start going after the higher skill jobs.  There are few jobs that given a sufficiently advanced AI and robots, that can't be replaced by a machine that does the job better, faster, cheaper, and doesn't need breaks.

So as more and more people are pushed out of being able to find work...how do we as a society respond?  How are we going to be required to reshape our values?  Our politics?  

It's an interesting question to me.  More interesting that just talking about AI and automation and some of the risks inherent to the technologies themselves....

They've been trying to replace people answering the phones for years without success.  Now you just burn 5-10 minutes before figuring out how to get ahold of someone who can actually help.  Even then they still have to ask you for your account number that you've already inputted.

You keep talking about a problem that is already here and then I go scan indeed and see hundreds of local jobs for painters, plumbers, hvac, electricians.  LOL...currently 1766 listings for truck drivers.

 

[Galileo]

The real issues is that many of the folks whose jobs will be replaced by automation are low skill, low education employees.  I agree that writing code is the place to be for the near future, or other highly skilled, highly specialized fields....but for most of the folks being replaced, that's not an option.  You can't expect to retrain all the truck drivers to be computer programmers.

And that's the real issue here.  Where will they go?  To the plants that have been automated as well?  To the warehouses that have been automated?  Automation targets repetitive, low skill jobs.  

Perhaps some % of them can be retrained and upgrade their skillsets moving them up on the skills ladder, but a huge % won't be.  And what will that do to our public concept of value?  Our personal concepts of value, tied to work?  Entitlements with requirements that you must work in order to deserve them.

Our society is in for all kinds of changes, but one of the things that seems inevitable is that we're going to have to struggle with whether a person is deserving of basic human care - food, shelter, healthcare, etc - merely by being a citizen in our country, and not based on the value that they offer to our country in terms of producing valued goods and services.

Well, maybe you can... Elon Musk has just started yet another company whose goal is to merge the human brain with computers

“If you assume any rate of advancement in [artificial intelligence], we will be left behind by a lot,” he said at a conference last June.

The solution he proposed was a “direct cortical interface”—essentially a layer of artificial intelligence inside the brain—that could enable humans to reach higher levels of function.

 

[Politician Spock]

They've been trying to replace people answering the phones for years without success.  Now you just burn 5-10 minutes before figuring out how to get ahold of someone who can actually help.  Even then they still have to ask you for your account number that you've already inputted.

You keep talking about a problem that is already here and then I go scan indeed and see hundreds of local jobs for painters, plumbers, hvac, electricians.  LOL...currently 1766 listings for truck drivers.

There are 3.5 million truck drivers in the US. I would have thought the number of truck driver listings would be a lot higher than 1766. 

 

[BassNBrew]

There are 3.5 million truck drivers in the US. I would have thought the number of truck driver listings would be a lot higher than 1766. 

That's one site in one city.

Regardless, today isn't the day that AI starts taking over.  The demand for labor still exceeds that rate of automation advancement in most fields.

 

[adonis]

And at first, they'll come for the low-skilled, low-education jobs.  Those are the low hanging fruits of automation.  

But when you combine automation and AI, you can start going after the higher skill jobs.  There are few jobs that given a sufficiently advanced AI and robots, that can't be replaced by a machine that does the job better, faster, cheaper, and doesn't need breaks.

So as more and more people are pushed out of being able to find work...how do we as a society respond?  How are we going to be required to reshape our values?  Our politics?  

It's an interesting question to me.  More interesting that just talking about AI and automation and some of the risks inherent to the technologies themselves....

They've been trying to replace people answering the phones for years without success.  Now you just burn 5-10 minutes before figuring out how to get ahold of someone who can actually help.  Even then they still have to ask you for your account number that you've already inputted.

You keep talking about a problem that is already here and then I go scan indeed and see hundreds of local jobs for painters, plumbers, hvac, electricians.  LOL...currently 1766 listings for truck drivers.

Are you denying that tons of folks have been released from jobs because their jobs have been automated?  Are manufacturing jobs getting harder and harder to find not only due to outsourcing to China (where jobs are also disappearing due to automation) but also due to factories automating previously low skilled jobs?

The mere presence of jobs available today doesn't mean that they're not disappearing.  Seems to be a strange argument to say "Look, these jobs still exist" in response to an argument saying the market is shrinking rapidly and automation, over time, will replace them all.

 

[Politician Spock]

That's one site in one city.

I know. I expected it to be higher. 3% of the workforce is truck drivers, and it's a job with high turnover rate. Truck driver listings are typically 10 to 20% of all job listings. So if there are 1766 truck driver listings, then the city has 8830 to 17660 job listings. Not sure what city you are referring to, but a city of a million people should have more than 17,660 job listings. 

 

[BassNBrew]

I know. I expected it to be higher. 3% of the workforce is truck drivers, and it's a job with high turnover rate. Truck driver listings are typically 10 to 20% of all job listings. So if there are 1766 truck driver listings, then the city has 8830 to 17660 job listings. Not sure what city you are referring to, but a city of a million people should have more than 17,660 job listings. 

28000 listed so about 6%.  Of course many of those ads are looking for multiple people.

 

[Da Guru]

Great topic. I can't comment too much on how AI and automation will change society because I'm not educated enough to do so, and based on some of the disagreements in here it's difficult to predict anyhow. 

But here is what I DO know: the OP lectures us that we need to change our thinking, especially conservatives. History shows again and again that society doesn't work that way. We will change only when forced to, by crisis and catastrophe. 

Why just conservatives?   Both parties need to change their thinking.  But of course both parties needed to change their thinking many years ago.  When you have leaders of parties that are pushing 80 years of age that change does not come easy.

 

[Politician Spock]

28000 listed so about 6%.  Of course many of those ads are looking for multiple people.

Yep. Truck driver listings are down. Of course this may be a seasonal dip. Demand for truck drivers spikes in the fall. 

 

[BassNBrew]

Are you denying that tons of folks have been released from jobs because their jobs have been automated?  Are manufacturing jobs getting harder and harder to find not only due to outsourcing to China (where jobs are also disappearing due to automation) but also due to factories automating previously low skilled jobs?

The mere presence of jobs available today doesn't mean that they're not disappearing.  Seems to be a strange argument to say "Look, these jobs still exist" in response to an argument saying the market is shrinking rapidly and automation, over time, will replace them all.

Automation is replacing low skilled jobs with skilled jobs.  If the automation can be kept domestically rather than replaced by hand assembly overseas.

You keep saying jobs are disappearing.  The way my oil and tires are changed hasn't changed in 30 years.  When I need my house painted a robot doesn't show up to do it.  The chairs are being shuffled (some of them overseas), but the chairs haven't been removed yet.

 

[adonis]

Great topic. I can't comment too much on how AI and automation will change society because I'm not educated enough to do so, and based on some of the disagreements in here it's difficult to predict anyhow. 

But here is what I DO know: the OP lectures us that we need to change our thinking, especially conservatives. History shows again and again that society doesn't work that way. We will change only when forced to, by crisis and catastrophe. 

Why just conservatives?   Both parties need to change their thinking.  But of course both parties needed to change their thinking many years ago.  When you have leaders of parties that are pushing 80 years of age that change does not come easy.

Agreed that both parties need to change their thinking, but one party is exceptionally focused on your ability to afford things dictating basic human services like eating, healthcare, and shelter.  One party is fixated on ending entitlements, and it's largely based on a thought that "you didn't earn that".

 

[adonis]

Are you denying that tons of folks have been released from jobs because their jobs have been automated?  Are manufacturing jobs getting harder and harder to find not only due to outsourcing to China (where jobs are also disappearing due to automation) but also due to factories automating previously low skilled jobs?

The mere presence of jobs available today doesn't mean that they're not disappearing.  Seems to be a strange argument to say "Look, these jobs still exist" in response to an argument saying the market is shrinking rapidly and automation, over time, will replace them all.

Automation is replacing low skilled jobs with skilled jobs.  If the automation can be kept domestically rather than replaced by hand assembly overseas.

You keep saying jobs are disappearing.  The way my oil and tires are changed hasn't changed in 30 years.  When I need my house painted a robot doesn't show up to do it.  The chairs are being shuffled (some of them overseas), but the chairs haven't been removed yet.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36376966

Foxconn replaced 60,000 workers with robots.  Do you think all 60,000 got skilled jobs?  

http://fortune.com/2016/11/08/china-automation-jobs/ - here's another link with a line in it that should be interesting:

. The study reports as well that trade accounted for 13% of the lost U.S. factory jobs, but 88% of the jobs were taken by robots and other factors at home.

and

If not China, what then explains these jobs losses? It’s simple: factories don't need as many workers as they used to, because robots increasingly do the work.

The world is changing, and has been for years.  You may not see it with your plumbers and oil changes...but the lower hanging fruit in terms of jobs that can be automated is taking place, and has been for some time.  As robotics and AI improve, the automation reach will expand. 

And with that expansion will most certainly NOT come with an equitable number of other kinds of jobs.  When robots replace 10,000 low skilled jobs, how many higher skilled jobs do you think are created to support the robots?  What fraction of 10,000?

 

[BassNBrew]

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36376966

Foxconn replaced 60,000 workers with robots.  Do you think all 60,000 got high skilled jobs?  

http://fortune.com/2016/11/08/china-automation-jobs/ - here's another link with a line in it that should be interesting:

and

The world is changing, and has been for years.  You may not see it with your plumbers and oil changes...but the lower hanging fruit in terms of jobs that can be automated is taking place, and has been for some time.  As robotics and AI improve, the automation reach will expand.

So what?  We survived the invention of electricity, the train, the auto, etc.  Until we are able to create stuff and make stuff happen instantly by speaking into our phone, we are just shuffling the chairs chasing the low hanging fruit.

 

[adonis]

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36376966

Foxconn replaced 60,000 workers with robots.  Do you think all 60,000 got high skilled jobs?  

http://fortune.com/2016/11/08/china-automation-jobs/ - here's another link with a line in it that should be interesting:

and

The world is changing, and has been for years.  You may not see it with your plumbers and oil changes...but the lower hanging fruit in terms of jobs that can be automated is taking place, and has been for some time.  As robotics and AI improve, the automation reach will expand.

So what?  We survived the invention of electricity, the train, the auto, etc.  Until we are able to create stuff and make stuff happen instantly by speaking into our phone, we are just shuffling the chairs chasing the low hanging fruit.

That's true.  Things like the industrial revolution moved folks from agriculture into factories.  In the past, when some jobs were lost due to advances, other lower skilled jobs were there to take their places.  In a world pre-computers, the disruption was significant, but there were other places for the folks to go.

With the advent of the computer, and the cheapening prices of robots, the better technology, software, and AI...things can be automated which couldn't be automated before.  And as they're automated in numbers never seen before, the low skilled labor market is drying up.

I mean, it's nice to have faith that these folks displaced will find homes in other industries....but realistically, where are they going to go?  Are all of them going to become plumbers, AC repairmen, service industry workers in the short term?

When you have factories automating tens of thousands of jobs in a single stroke, where are these folks going?  You're already seeing when the automotive industries fell on hard times, folks had hard times finding new places to go.  When coal mines shut down, where are these people going?  

When we automate driving, where will the former truck drivers or other delivery folks go?  Sure, some other jobs will open up, but you have to assume it'll only be a small fraction of the number of jobs replaced.

 

[Black Box]

That's true.  Things like the industrial revolution moved folks from agriculture into factories.  In the past, when some jobs were lost due to advances, other lower skilled jobs were there to take their places.  In a world pre-computers, the disruption was significant, but there were other places for the folks to go.

With the advent of the computer, and the cheapening prices of robots, the better technology, software, and AI...things can be automated which couldn't be automated before.  And as they're automated in numbers never seen before, the low skilled labor market is drying up.

I mean, it's nice to have faith that these folks displaced will find homes in other industries....but realistically, where are they going to go?  Are all of them going to become plumbers, AC repairmen, service industry workers in the short term?

When you have factories automating tens of thousands of jobs in a single stroke, where are these folks going?  You're already seeing when the automotive industries fell on hard times, folks had hard times finding new places to go.  When coal mines shut down, where are these people going?  

When we automate driving, where will the former truck drivers or other delivery folks go?  Sure, some other jobs will open up, but you have to assume it'll only be a small fraction of the number of jobs replaced.

Someone has to go and colonize Mars.

 

[Jobber]

In the IT industry, we are automating many tasks now. Where before, you needed dozens of OS builders/support for Linux, AIX, Windows, etc for build and support of infrastructure. Now with our automated build and configuration tools, we have no need for so many of those people. Headcounts are decreasing in most areas in IT in my company directly because of automation.

 

[adonis]

Someone has to go and colonize Mars.

I think that's funny in some respects, but I think it's legitimately an option.  Modern Pilgrims or Explorers, who had to leave their homelands because of crowding out (by robots in this case), in search of new frontiers where they're useful.

The problem with this is that most of them, most of the ones at first, will be required to be pretty skilled folks.

 

[chet]

So what?  We survived the invention of electricity, the train, the auto, etc.  Until we are able to create stuff and make stuff happen instantly by speaking into our phone, we are just shuffling the chairs chasing the low hanging fruit.

Society had the timeframe to adjust to the industrial revolution. Musk has said that he believes that once AI is smarter and more inventive than the smartest, most creative human, it could be a matter of days before that invention is smarter than the sum of humanity. If true, the implications are potentially calamitous for our species. 

 

[Politician Spock]

Automation is replacing low skilled jobs with skilled jobs.  If the automation can be kept domestically rather than replaced by hand assembly overseas.

You keep saying jobs are disappearing.  The way my oil and tires are changed hasn't changed in 30 years.  When I need my house painted a robot doesn't show up to do it.  The chairs are being shuffled (some of them overseas), but the chairs haven't been removed yet.

When you need a cab to the airport, a robot WILL show up to take you to the airport. And given using these autonomous cars will be cheaper than owning a car, yes the way your oil and tires are changed WILL change given you won't need your oil and tires changed anymore since you wont own a car. The autonomous cars will be managed so efficiently while off the road, they will probably move through a system where a robot will change the old and tires, which will be far more efficient given the lack of customer service needed to make you a happy oil and tire changing customer. 

 

[Politician Spock]

I believe the result we are headed for is the natural result of corporatism. Not to blame the freeing of slaves for anything, but when the US freed slaves it also freed corporations. Up until that time a corporation could only exist with a government charter, and the charter would only be issued when the corporation would produce something for the common good. When the slaves were freed, corporations were also freed to exist for any and every reason. The natural result of this would take centuries to unfold, but we are now seeing the result become clearer and clearer. It has shifted the populace from the lucrative place on the P&L report to a place on the P&L that is getting more and more crowded.

Prior to corporatism nearly every business was a sole proprietorship. Whether it was a farm, a market, a lawyer, doctor, etc.... most people earned their way of life from the profit line of the P&L report. And they ran their businesses in such a way as to maximize that line as much as possible, resulting in the earnings they need for their way of life being maximized. One of the ways to maximize the profit line is to lower the costs of the other lines on the P&L report as much as possible. One of those lines being the labor cost. You hire someone as cheap as possible. Even slaves weren't free. Room and board cost money. Room and & board was the cost of labor for slave owners. So whether it's slavery or employment, it's just a labor cost, and those that make their living in that line will always have a natural force pushing down on them. Society as a whole is far better off when the majority of the populace makes their living from the profit line as opposed to the labor cost line.

And that really is the source of the negative consequences of corporatism as it continues to grow decade after decade, century after century. Sole proprietorships cannot compete with the collective resources of corporations. And as the years and the decades unfold, more and more of the populace shifts from making their living from the profit line to making their living from the labor cost line. Profit is becoming less and less of a way to make a living and more and more of a way for investors to grow their existing wealth. This means that more and more of the populace has a natural downward force on their work efforts, as opposed to the way it used to be where there was a natural upward force on the worth of their efforts by having their efforts paid for in the profit line. Profit used to be the reward for work effort, but thanks to corporatism profit is now the reward for capital risk. If you don't own capital, thanks to corporatism, your place is in the labor cost line. The sad irony being that many people in the labor cost line can't even afford to pay for their own adequate room and board, when slave owners had no choice but to make sure their slaves had adequate room and board. But hey, if they don't like their job, they can quit, right?

 

[adonis]

Interesting PS.

Reading that reminds me that the forces of globalization have been at work for a long time, but only recently expanded globally.  But with the diminishment of sole proprietors as communities grew larger and grew together more, with more concentrated groups of people in cities being able to band together to tackle bigger problems and more ambitious goals, the force began.  And once it consumed everything possible to squeeze profits out domestically, expansion globally took place...and it does seem that the trend to increase profits and decrease costs has had some negative impacts on the workers.

Up until recently, there was enough low-skilled jobs to pad the landing of folks being tossed out of industries where their work could be valued and paid a living wage.  But with each advancement, jobs became less plentiful but never before at the pace jobs are being replaced by robots today.  It's unprecedented, and it's definitely driven by the corporate culture of maximizing profits.

I wonder if we're going to get to a point where things like Unions sprung from.  Corporations, seeking to squeeze more and more profits from everything, are really going to result in driving out almost every opportunity for low skill, low education workers to find employment.  As a result, do we continue to allow the unfettered greed of corporations, which has driven business successfully for a long time in our free market, to follow itself to its natural end which is optimized efficiency, at whatever cost to humanity?

We are not subjects of a corporate world...corporations exist, and were possible, because of human labor, but now...just as robots are threatening to take away most of our jobs, the robots didn't do this on their own, it was the corporations who built the robots, using human labor, to replace human labor, to make corporations more money.

I'm not trying to demonize corporations here...but it's certainly worth thinking about...along the lines of Bill Gates suggestion to tax robotic equivalent work units of humans, and use that revenue to provide services for the displaced workers.  Because if you don't do that, then you're transferring the wealth from the workers to the corporations, and the workers have no where else to go to find employment to provide for themselves or their families.

 

[Politician Spock]

Interesting PS.

Reading that reminds me that the forces of globalization have been at work for a long time, but only recently expanded globally.  But with the diminishment of sole proprietors as communities grew larger and grew together more, with more concentrated groups of people in cities being able to band together to tackle bigger problems and more ambitious goals, the force began.  And once it consumed everything possible to squeeze profits out domestically, expansion globally took place...and it does seem that the trend to increase profits and decrease costs has had some negative impacts on the workers.

Up until recently, there was enough low-skilled jobs to pad the landing of folks being tossed out of industries where their work could be valued and paid a living wage.  But with each advancement, jobs became less plentiful but never before at the pace jobs are being replaced by robots today.  It's unprecedented, and it's definitely driven by the corporate culture of maximizing profits.

I wonder if we're going to get to a point where things like Unions sprung from.  Corporations, seeking to squeeze more and more profits from everything, are really going to result in driving out almost every opportunity for low skill, low education workers to find employment.  As a result, do we continue to allow the unfettered greed of corporations, which has driven business successfully for a long time in our free market, to follow itself to its natural end which is optimized efficiency, at whatever cost to humanity?

We are not subjects of a corporate world...corporations exist, and were possible, because of human labor, but now...just as robots are threatening to take away most of our jobs, the robots didn't do this on their own, it was the corporations who built the robots, using human labor, to replace human labor, to make corporations more money.

I'm not trying to demonize corporations here...but it's certainly worth thinking about...along the lines of Bill Gates suggestion to tax robotic equivalent work units of humans, and use that revenue to provide services for the displaced workers.  Because if you don't do that, then you're transferring the wealth from the workers to the corporations, and the workers have no where else to go to find employment to provide for themselves or their families.

The growth of the negative consequences of corporatism will graph like a hockey stick. The problem seems to small to notice, but once it makes that turn, society is going to suffer greatly from it very quickly. 

 

[BassNBrew]

When you need a cab to the airport, a robot WILL show up to take you to the airport. And given using these autonomous cars will be cheaper than owning a car, yes the way your oil and tires are changed WILL change given you won't need your oil and tires changed anymore since you wont own a car. The autonomous cars will be managed so efficiently while off the road, they will probably move through a system where a robot will change the old and tires, which will be far more efficient given the lack of customer service needed to make you a happy oil and tire changing customer. 

I just don't see it.  As long as we have a thriving population of lawmakers and lawyers and human juries, the robots don't stand a chance.  When the #### hits the fan someone gets killed by or in the robot car, robot car corporation will be sued out of business.  While that's being litigated, Raleigh will once again change the sale and sue tax laws and our robot driver won't be collecting the the proper tax.  If the penalties and interest don't get the robot, the jail time will.  Of course all it is one crazy town council to ban robots driving through their town and forcing them to take a 30 min detour around to derail the whole concept robot drivers.

Just a little too much utopia needed for the robots to take over any time soon.  They're more likely to kill us all before being able to legal displace all of us.

 

[adonis]

The growth of the negative consequences of corporatism will graph like a hockey stick. The problem seems to small to notice, but once it makes that turn, society is going to suffer greatly from it very quickly. 

I think we're at the base of the turn right now...rapidly accelerating from a straight line increase into an exponential one.

There's really nothing in our society that's prepared for these changes.

 

[adonis]

I just don't see it.  As long as we have a thriving population of lawmakers and lawyers and human juries, the robots don't stand a chance.  When the #### hits the fan someone gets killed by or in the robot car, robot car corporation will be sued out of business.  While that's being litigated, Raleigh will once again change the sale and sue tax laws and our robot driver won't be collecting the the proper tax.  If the penalties and interest don't get the robot, the jail time will.  Of course all it is one crazy town council to ban robots driving through their town and forcing them to take a 30 min detour around to derail the whole concept robot drivers.

Just a little too much utopia needed for the robots to take over any time soon.  They're more likely to kill us all before being able to legal displace all of us.

They don't have to take over to majorly disrupt us.  They just have to be good enough to take enough low-skill, low education jobs to create societal problems of epic proportions.

It's not necessary for robots to come to your house and to fix your plumbing issues for this to be a reality.  It's already here...i posted two articles to show you evidence where tens of thousands of jobs are being taken away and not being replaced.  I could show you hundreds of similar articles.  It's happening, it's here, and it will only get worse.

But again, you imagine we're saying AI robots walking around totally replacing folks...and while that may happen eventually, it's not what's necessary to cause this disruption.  What's necessary to cause this disruption is already here...it's technology that exists today...not a future thing.

Self-driving cars exist today...they just need a little more refinement...it's not like jet packs.  It's not like hoverboards.  This is real stuff.

Society is struggling to handle just the beginning of this shift.  Self-driving cars will be a reality in less than a decade, and millions of white males will be suddenly unemployed, with no sufficient industries out there for them to move to.  The impact on society of this shift is difficult to understate.

 

[Politician Spock]

I just don't see it.  As long as we have a thriving population of lawmakers and lawyers and human juries, the robots don't stand a chance.  When the #### hits the fan someone gets killed by or in the robot car, robot car corporation will be sued out of business.  While that's being litigated, Raleigh will once again change the sale and sue tax laws and our robot driver won't be collecting the the proper tax.  If the penalties and interest don't get the robot, the jail time will.  Of course all it is one crazy town council to ban robots driving through their town and forcing them to take a 30 min detour around to derail the whole concept robot drivers.

Just a little too much utopia needed for the robots to take over any time soon.  They're more likely to kill us all before being able to legal displace all of us.

First of all, people have already been killed by self driving cars. I recall a Tesla crashing into the the bed of a truck that was crossing a highway at an intersection because the Tesla computer thought it looked like an overpass.

The reason they won't be sued out of existence is the data showing that computers are safer drivers than people are, despite the fact that even computers can make mistakes too. When the populace accepts the truth that we are all safer with computers doing the driving as opposed to humans doing the driving, the future arrives.

 

[BassNBrew]

Interesting PS.

Reading that reminds me that the forces of globalization have been at work for a long time, but only recently expanded globally.  But with the diminishment of sole proprietors as communities grew larger and grew together more, with more concentrated groups of people in cities being able to band together to tackle bigger problems and more ambitious goals, the force began.  And once it consumed everything possible to squeeze profits out domestically, expansion globally took place...and it does seem that the trend to increase profits and decrease costs has had some negative impacts on the workers.

Up until recently, there was enough low-skilled jobs to pad the landing of folks being tossed out of industries where their work could be valued and paid a living wage.  But with each advancement, jobs became less plentiful but never before at the pace jobs are being replaced by robots today.  It's unprecedented, and it's definitely driven by the corporate culture of maximizing profits.

I wonder if we're going to get to a point where things like Unions sprung from.  Corporations, seeking to squeeze more and more profits from everything, are really going to result in driving out almost every opportunity for low skill, low education workers to find employment.  As a result, do we continue to allow the unfettered greed of corporations, which has driven business successfully for a long time in our free market, to follow itself to its natural end which is optimized efficiency, at whatever cost to humanity?

We are not subjects of a corporate world...corporations exist, and were possible, because of human labor, but now...just as robots are threatening to take away most of our jobs, the robots didn't do this on their own, it was the corporations who built the robots, using human labor, to replace human labor, to make corporations more money.

I'm not trying to demonize corporations here...but it's certainly worth thinking about...along the lines of Bill Gates suggestion to tax robotic equivalent work units of humans, and use that revenue to provide services for the displaced workers.  Because if you don't do that, then you're transferring the wealth from the workers to the corporations, and the workers have no where else to go to find employment to provide for themselves or their families.

I love my illegal cheap labor as much as Timshochet, but if you eliminated that sub-culture, those may become better paying jobs again.  Between that and a decent minimum wage we may be able to accommodate some of the displaced unskilled labor.

Not sure how it would play out, but efficiency should bring us reduced work weeks.  Maybe a gov't law reducing the work week to 32 hours would cut into the corporationalism Spock is talking about???

 

[adonis]

I love my illegal cheap labor as much as Timshochet, but if you eliminated that sub-culture, those may become better paying jobs again.  Between that and a decent minimum wage we may be able to accommodate some of the displaced unskilled labor.

Not sure how it would play out, but efficiency should bring us reduced work weeks.  Maybe a gov't law reducing the work week to 32 hours would cut into the corporationalism Spock is talking about???

I think there are likely some things the government could do that would require taxation and heavy regulation of the business world in order to protect workers.

However, do you believe conservatives are supportive of such considerations?

 

[BassNBrew]

First of all, people have already been killed by self driving cars. I recall a Tesla crashing into the the bed of a truck that was crossing a highway at an intersection because the Tesla computer thought it looked like an overpass.

The reason they won't be sued out of existence is the data showing that computers are safer drivers than people are, despite the fact that even computers can make mistakes too. When the populace accepts the truth that we are all safer with computers doing the driving as opposed to humans doing the driving, the future arrives.

The same populace that treks to church on Sundays, is split on the dope, and debates abortion every 4 years?  

I fully agree that computers are safer than humans.  That's just going to raise the bar for the computers.  Humans make mistakes = $50MM award.  Not programming for a problem that should have been anticipated = $50MMM award.

 

[E Street Brat]

What makes you think there were be many unskilled and uneducated people when this hits.

Plug a flash drive into the USB port at the base of your skull. And download whatever you need to get the job done.

I seen a documentary were a guy actually learned Kung Fu using this method.

 

[Politician Spock]

The same populace that treks to church on Sundays, is split on the dope, and debates abortion every 4 years?  

I fully agree that computers are safer than humans.  That's just going to raise the bar for the computers.  Humans make mistakes = $50MM award.  Not programming for a problem that should have been anticipated = $50MMM award.

I definitely agree with you that society is too dumb today to accept the truth.

But if you asked me the day after the 2004 election if gay marriage would ever become legal in the US, I would have said no, and would have pointed to all the states that just voted to modify their constitutions to protect the definition of marriage. Which, by the way, was when I was still a christian and voted for my state's amendment. I changed. I changed so much I'm no longer a christian. And society as a whole changed so much that gays were freed to marry. 

Like adonis, I believe self driving cars are a decade away.... not because of how much more development is needed in the technology, but because of the change society needs to go through to accept it. 

 

[BassNBrew]

I think there are likely some things the government could do that would require taxation and heavy regulation of the business world in order to protect workers.

However, do you believe conservatives are supportive of such considerations?

Based on liberals letting Wall Street run wild over the last couple of decades and most recently letting Big Insurance and Pharma write ACA, I don't believe either conservatives or liberals are looking out for the worker.

I'm a supporter of BIG and I think that resolves the issue pretty easily.  If the robots take half the jobs, then we work part time and live off our BIG.  Personally I think Trump was a step in the right direction (just the wrong person).  Maybe Gates or someone like him will step up to the plate and easily solve some of the issues you bring up.

 

[msommer]

Someone has to go and colonize Mars.

A new world awaits you in the off world colonies.....

 

[Politician Spock]

What makes you think there were be many unskilled and uneducated people when this hits.

Plug a flash drive into the USB port at the base of your skull. And download whatever you need to get the job done.

I seen a documentary were a guy actually learned Kung Fu using this method.

I saw that documentary too.... good info, and highly recommended.

Although the documentary as a whole probably make adonis' point given the documentary shows a world run by machines where humans are used as nothing but a resource commodity. 

 

[BassNBrew]

I definitely agree with you that society is too dumb today to accept the truth.

But if you asked me the day after the 2004 election if gay marriage would ever become legal in the US, I would have said no, and would have pointed to all the states that just voted to modify their constitutions to protect the definition of marriage. Which, by the way, was when I was still a christian and voted for my state's amendment. I changed. I changed so much I'm no longer a christian. And society as a whole changed so much that gays were freed to marry. 

Like adonis, I believe self driving cars are a decade away.... not because of how much more development is needed in the technology, but because of the change society needs to go through to accept it. 

Regarding your last line, I don't think we move that fast.  Look at the vote on the cadillac tax last year.

 

[Politician Spock]

Regarding your last line, I don't think we move that fast.  Look at the vote on the cadillac tax last year.

I think the rate at which society changes is speeding up. A big reason a human is unwilling to change their mind is because they've lived so much of their life with a lack of exposure to life outside of their small little world. Thanks to technology kids today don't suffer from that isolation, and as they become adults they're not as closed minded as their parents. Dumb beliefs, like religion, need isolation in order to survive.

 

[Sand]

I'm a supporter of BIG and I think that resolves the issue pretty easily.  If the robots take half the jobs, then we work part time and live off our BIG.  Personally I think Trump was a step in the right direction (just the wrong person).  Maybe Gates or someone like him will step up to the plate and easily solve some of the issues you bring up.

IMO, the minute we need to institute a BIG is the signal that civilization will end as we know it.  That's a sign that we have made too many people sub-commoditized (PS's term, which fits).  Look at those in the category now in the inner cities - huge crime problems.  Idle hands.  Those folks, who will be a much greater percentage than they are today, won't be satisfied with the comparison to those who have skills (and thus salaries and wealth).  Huge civil unrest at that point is unavoidable.

One upside - the demand for police will skyrocket.  So at least one growth area.

 

[adonis]

I wonder if AI could give all us peons jobs to keep us busy and happy.  I really wonder if that's going to be the (poorly worded) final solution.  AI's will figure out work for humans and specifically prevent or stop robots from doing it, because we know folks have to work in order to be happy.

 

[Sand]

It's why Gates and others have floated ideas to tax robots and so forth.  

Now there's a new job field.  Define robot.  Define classes of robots.  All for taxation purposes.  Think of the beaurocrats we can generate with this!

 

[BassNBrew]

IMO, the minute we need to institute a BIG is the signal that civilization will end as we know it.  That's a sign that we have made too many people sub-commoditized (PS's term, which fits).  Look at those in the category now in the inner cities - huge crime problems.  Idle hands.  Those folks, who will be a much greater percentage than they are today, won't be satisfied with the comparison to those who have skills (and thus salaries and wealth).  Huge civil unrest at that point is unavoidable.

One upside - the demand for police will skyrocket.  So at least one growth area.

BIG ends all welfare.  Right now the system is setup not to work.

As robots take over we could look at reducing the retirement age to chew up some of the excess labor.

 

[BassNBrew]

Now there's a new job field.  Define robot.  Define classes of robots.  All for taxation purposes.  Think of the beaurocrats we can generate with this!

Clear you PM box please...

 

[Sand]

Clear you PM box please...

Cleared a bit.

BIG ends all welfare.  Right now the system is setup not to work.

As robots take over we could look at reducing the retirement age to chew up some of the excess labor.

BIG puts everyone on welfare.  IMO, of course.

 

[BassNBrew]

Cleared a bit.

BIG puts everyone on welfare.  IMO, of course.

Well you could send your BIG check to me if it made you feel better about yourself. 

 

[roadkill1292]

Cleared a bit.

BIG puts everyone on welfare.  IMO, of course.

It may look pretty attractive when there are no jobs for you.