What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Lowes Robot (1 Viewer)

NCCommish

Footballguy
As we all know robots have taken many manufacturing jobs. Those people got pushed into service jobs. Uh-oh:


Lowe’s LOW -0.09% Cos. is introducing robotic shopping assistants at an Orchard Supply Hardware store in San Jose, Calif., in late November. Lowe’s, which acquired Orchard Supply last year, says this is the first retail robot of its kind in the U.S.

The OSHbot will greet customers, ask if they need help and guide them through the store to the product. Besides natural-language-processing technology, the 5-foot tall white robot houses two large rectangular screens—front and back—for video conferences with a store expert and to display in-store specials. The head features a 3-D scanner to help customers identify items. OSHbot speaks English and Spanish, but other languages will be added.

OSHbot, co-created by Lowe’s and startup Fellow Robots, is “solving a big problem,” said Kyle Nel, executive director of Lowe’s Innovation Labs. It is a way to bring more shopping convenience and some of the benefits of e-commerce into a physical store. The company will have two robots working, he said.

Big-box stores once offered convenience with one-stop shopping. But with Amazon.com Inc. AMZN +0.13% and smartphones, customers can check stock and read reviews and details about products.

“Instead of seeming ultra-convenient, the big-box experience starts to look like it has a lot of friction,” said Doug Stephens, founder of advisory firm Retail Prophet. “If robots are a means of alleviating some of that friction, I’d expect to see a lot more robots,” he added.

As customers follow OSHbot to the correct aisle, they will see ads for in-store specials on its back screen as they pass various departments, communicated through in-store beacons. Customers who need help with, say, a specific type of plumbing project can initiate a video conference on OSHbot’s front screen with available experts at any Orchard store.

OSHbot also can help customers match a certain-size nail or hinge with a 3D-scanner and determine immediately if the part is in stock. In the future, OSHbot may be able to create the part with a 3-D printer, said Marco Mascorro, CEO of Fellow Robots, based in Mountain View, Calif.

To navigate the Orchard store, OSHbot uses lasers to sense its surroundings, the same light detection and ranging system, also called Lidar, used by Google Inc. GOOGL -0.64% ’s autonomous cars. OSHbot creates a map of its surroundings using technology called simultaneous localization and mapping that it can refer to later. By matching the map it creates to the Orchard Supply map of where products are located in the store, it can lead a customer to a specific hinge or hammer.

OSHbot was born at Singularity University Labs, based near the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Ames Research Center in Mountain View, Calif. SU Labs brings together technology startups with large companies looking to make the technological leaps necessary to keep them competitive.

Ten months after they began, Lowe’s and Fellow Robots are putting OSHbot in a store to find out how customers react and make it easier to use.

Now the question is whether OSHbot represents one giant step—or glide, for those devices on wheels—for robots in retail. The International Federation of Robotics estimates sales of more than 400 robots world-wide between 2014 and 2017 that serve as guides or information providers in places such as supermarkets, exhibitions or museums.

There haven’t been more robots in stores to date because the technology hadn’t matured enough, but that is changing, said Andra Keay, managing director of Silicon Valley Robotics, an industry trade association.

One hurdle robot makers have faced is making them affordable. A Lowe’s spokesperson declined to say how much it spent on OSHbot. The company has two robots now and may introduce two more soon. The idea is to start small, build the robot on its own and figure out what works, she said.

The components OSHbot uses are pricey. For example, Lidar systems that help robots to navigate cost roughly $50,000, although there are new smaller units hitting the market for about $7,000, said Ms. Keay.

Still, as the technology matures and becomes more affordable, Ms. Keay expects robots to appear not only in retail, but restaurants and other kinds of businesses as well. In August, Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc. introduced a room-service robot at its Aloft hotel in Cupertino, Calif. “I think we’re going to see a rush of companies wanting to be the first [in their industry] to have robots,” Ms. Keay said.
WSJ

As we have discussed in the past it is only a matter of time before very few jobs require humans. Robots in service industries are going to force workers out despite employers empty assurances. We have a major crap storm headed our way in less than 20 years IMO. We are going to have lots of people and not many jobs. Then what?

 
I think a robot might be overkill for that. At places like Lowes and HD, I'd settle for some touch screen where I can enter what I want and it tells me Aisle 5, Shelf C, Bin 8. Ikea has that and I love it. Never understood why the other big box stores don't have it.

 
I don't regard this as a concern. Robots are fine for behind the scenes jobs but when it comes to anything that involves human interaction, people will always prefer other people. A robot at a department store is an attraction; a novelty act. I don't believe it will ever be anything more than that.

 
I think a robot might be overkill for that. At places like Lowes and HD, I'd settle for some touch screen where I can enter what I want and it tells me Aisle 5, Shelf C, Bin 8. Ikea has that and I love it. Never understood why the other big box stores don't have it.
Not if the idea is to cut workers it isn't. Which is the ultimate end game.

 
Because the Big Box stores dont always put that merchandise where its supposed to be. I purchased a new grill from Lowe's through their website two Friday's ago. I set it up for in store pick up as it was the last one left. I went to pick it up the next day. I had already called to confirm it was in stock and to see if they could assemble it for me. It was in stock but they couldnt assemble it by the next day. So I go in that Saturday to pick up the grill and suddenly its nowhere to be found. It wasnt picked and staged for me to pick up and suddenly it was lost. They were going to give me a different grill at a significant discount. I was in a bind and needed that grill for an event the next day. After waiting for them to bring me the alternate grill for what seemed like an eternity the stock boy returns and miraculously has found the grill I orginally ordered.

The Lowes Bot might not have helped me in this case. But it seems it might be helpful in some instances where the employees are inept.

 
I don't regard this as a concern. Robots are fine for behind the scenes jobs but when it comes to anything that involves human interaction, people will always prefer other people. A robot at a department store is an attraction; a novelty act. I don't believe it will ever be anything more than that.
So are you saying you'd rather go to a Home Depot than Lowes because HD has people?

I'd think you'd go to the place with the lower prices, as many/most Americans would. If these robots can help lower their prices (lower overhead), as well as be a novelty attractor, it could be a "win/win" for them as a company.

 
I think a robot might be overkill for that. At places like Lowes and HD, I'd settle for some touch screen where I can enter what I want and it tells me Aisle 5, Shelf C, Bin 8. Ikea has that and I love it. Never understood why the other big box stores don't have it.
Not if the idea is to cut workers it isn't. Which is the ultimate end game.
Pretty sure the touch screen will be just fine in replacing the guy who doesn't know where something is because that's not his department.

 
I don't regard this as a concern. Robots are fine for behind the scenes jobs but when it comes to anything that involves human interaction, people will always prefer other people. A robot at a department store is an attraction; a novelty act. I don't believe it will ever be anything more than that.
Actually Tim research suggests people are fine with robots as long as they retain their robotness. The more they look like humans the less humans like them. C3PO is fine. However a robot or android that looks almost human but is a bit off is a big put off.

 
I think a robot might be overkill for that. At places like Lowes and HD, I'd settle for some touch screen where I can enter what I want and it tells me Aisle 5, Shelf C, Bin 8. Ikea has that and I love it. Never understood why the other big box stores don't have it.
Not if the idea is to cut workers it isn't. Which is the ultimate end game.
Pretty sure the touch screen will be just fine in replacing the guy who doesn't know where something is because that's not his department.
Pretty sure he isn't the only one going to be replaced and that isn't the only reason.

 
I don't regard this as a concern. Robots are fine for behind the scenes jobs but when it comes to anything that involves human interaction, people will always prefer other people. A robot at a department store is an attraction; a novelty act. I don't believe it will ever be anything more than that.
Disagree. One of the things I like about Sheetz & Wawa is that I just type in my order on a touch screen. No relaying it to a person a coupe times who will inevitably mess it up because when I said "No onions" they thought I meant "Double onions."

 
people will always prefer other people
Wanna bet? People generally suck. Bring on the drones.

We have a major crap storm headed our way in less than 20 years IMO. We are going to have lots of people and not many jobs. Then what?
Then what? The guy currently ambling around a Lowes wearing an apron who isn't much help when you need it can be re-classified/re-trained to monitor and maintain Lowes' new service-robot army. Someone will need to change the batteries and upgrade the software. May as well be that guy.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't regard this as a concern. Robots are fine for behind the scenes jobs but when it comes to anything that involves human interaction, people will always prefer other people. A robot at a department store is an attraction; a novelty act. I don't believe it will ever be anything more than that.
Disagree. One of the things I like about Sheetz & Wawa is that I just type in my order on a touch screen. No relaying it to a person a coupe times who will inevitably mess it up because when I said "No onions" they thought I meant "Double onions."
Now have that screen wired to a robot that can make sandwiches and you just eliminated most of the fast food jobs. We already have burger and pizza making robots. No reason to think a submaker isn't on the way.

 
people will always prefer other people
Wanna bet? People generally suck. Bring on the drones.

We have a major crap storm headed our way in less than 20 years IMO. We are going to have lots of people and not many jobs. Then what?
Then what? The guy currently ambling around a Lowes wearing an apron who isn't much help when you need it can be re-classified/re-trained to monitor and maintain Lowes' new service-robot army. Someone will need to change the batteries and upgrade the software.
Robots are already, and will certainly be in the future, pretty much self repair and service. If anything comes up a robot will service the robot. There will be a relative handful of jobs involved in making sure everything is running smoothly but they aren't going to the former lumber section guy.

 
I think a robot might be overkill for that. At places like Lowes and HD, I'd settle for some touch screen where I can enter what I want and it tells me Aisle 5, Shelf C, Bin 8. Ikea has that and I love it. Never understood why the other big box stores don't have it.
Not if the idea is to cut workers it isn't. Which is the ultimate end game.
Pretty sure the touch screen will be just fine in replacing the guy who doesn't know where something is because that's not his department.
Pretty sure he isn't the only one going to be replaced and that isn't the only reason.
I'm sure. But I still don't see why if the goal is to replace human workers they can't just go with much cheaper computer stations instead of the over the top robots. Why follow a robot when a computer can tell you exactly where it is? That scanner the robot has to determine your nail size, can easily be hooked up to the computer that tells you where things are. Hook that computer up to inventory and it can tell you if it's in stock, just like the robot. The robot is a gimmick. The jobs are going away, but it won't be from that thing.

 
I don't regard this as a concern. Robots are fine for behind the scenes jobs but when it comes to anything that involves human interaction, people will always prefer other people. A robot at a department store is an attraction; a novelty act. I don't believe it will ever be anything more than that.
Disagree. One of the things I like about Sheetz & Wawa is that I just type in my order on a touch screen. No relaying it to a person a coupe times who will inevitably mess it up because when I said "No onions" they thought I meant "Double onions."
Now have that screen wired to a robot that can make sandwiches and you just eliminated most of the fast food jobs. We already have burger and pizza making robots. No reason to think a submaker isn't on the way.
So no worrying about the robot spitting in my food or shorting me on the bacon? I'm liking this robot utopia more and more.

 
I think a robot might be overkill for that. At places like Lowes and HD, I'd settle for some touch screen where I can enter what I want and it tells me Aisle 5, Shelf C, Bin 8. Ikea has that and I love it. Never understood why the other big box stores don't have it.
Not if the idea is to cut workers it isn't. Which is the ultimate end game.
Pretty sure the touch screen will be just fine in replacing the guy who doesn't know where something is because that's not his department.
Pretty sure he isn't the only one going to be replaced and that isn't the only reason.
I'm sure. But I still don't see why if the goal is to replace human workers they can't just go with much cheaper computer stations instead of the over the top robots. Why follow a robot when a computer can tell you exactly where it is? That scanner the robot has to determine your nail size, can easily be hooked up to the computer that tells you where things are. Hook that computer up to inventory and it can tell you if it's in stock, just like the robot. The robot is a gimmick. The jobs are going away, but it won't be from that thing.
Oh sure this model is very early. And they may find that what you say is true. But this robot is just a harbinger of something everyone is pretending isn't going to happen and we are doing no planning for it. We will regret that IMO>

 
I don't regard this as a concern. Robots are fine for behind the scenes jobs but when it comes to anything that involves human interaction, people will always prefer other people. A robot at a department store is an attraction; a novelty act. I don't believe it will ever be anything more than that.
Disagree. One of the things I like about Sheetz & Wawa is that I just type in my order on a touch screen. No relaying it to a person a coupe times who will inevitably mess it up because when I said "No onions" they thought I meant "Double onions."
Now have that screen wired to a robot that can make sandwiches and you just eliminated most of the fast food jobs. We already have burger and pizza making robots. No reason to think a submaker isn't on the way.
So no worrying about the robot spitting in my food or shorting me on the bacon? I'm liking this robot utopia more and more.
You might find a nut or bolt but true, no spit.

 
Sure, until they make battery changing robots.
But who changes THEIR batteries....And THEIR batteries....and THEIR batteries.....*head explodes*

people will always prefer other people
Wanna bet? People generally suck. Bring on the drones.

We have a major crap storm headed our way in less than 20 years IMO. We are going to have lots of people and not many jobs. Then what?
Then what? The guy currently ambling around a Lowes wearing an apron who isn't much help when you need it can be re-classified/re-trained to monitor and maintain Lowes' new service-robot army. Someone will need to change the batteries and upgrade the software.
Robots are already, and will certainly be in the future, pretty much self repair and service. If anything comes up a robot will service the robot. There will be a relative handful of jobs involved in making sure everything is running smoothly but they aren't going to the former lumber section guy.
Sarcasm meter down?

Yeah, I get it. My point was....I don't really care. If I need to find a freaking garden weasel and three Lowes employees can't help me, but the robot can, I will happily let R5-D4 show me where it is. The thought "FFS! That ain't a person! It'll be anarchy!! Think of the children of the lumber guy!!" will never cross my mind. Hell, I may hop on top of the thing and ride it to the garden section like I'm in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sure, until they make battery changing robots.
But who changes THEIR batteries....And THEIR batteries....and THEIR batteries.....*head explodes*

people will always prefer other people
Wanna bet? People generally suck. Bring on the drones.

We have a major crap storm headed our way in less than 20 years IMO. We are going to have lots of people and not many jobs. Then what?
Then what? The guy currently ambling around a Lowes wearing an apron who isn't much help when you need it can be re-classified/re-trained to monitor and maintain Lowes' new service-robot army. Someone will need to change the batteries and upgrade the software.
Robots are already, and will certainly be in the future, pretty much self repair and service. If anything comes up a robot will service the robot. There will be a relative handful of jobs involved in making sure everything is running smoothly but they aren't going to the former lumber section guy.
Sarcasm meter down?

Yeah, I get it. My point was....I don't really care. If I need to find a freaking garden weasel and three Lowes employees can't help me, but the robot can, I will happily let R5-D4 show me where it is. The thought "FFS! That ain't a person! It'll be anarchy!! Think of the children of the lumber guy!!" will never cross my mind. Hell, I may hop on top of the thing and ride it to the garden section like I'm in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade.
It's not necessarily the lumber guys kids and grand kids you should be concerned about, but your own.

 
I think you guys are missing my point a little bit. Why do people go to stores in the first place when they can buy just about anything they want on the internet these days and have it delivered to them, often for cheaper? Why do they go to the movies when they can simply watch television, and order whatever movie they want? Why do they go to public restaurants, when it is much cheaper to purchase the food you want at a market and prepare it yourself, or order it made and delivered?

The answer to all these questions, according to sociologists, is the same: because people enjoy human interaction. Most people like being in a crowd of other people (despite constant assertions that they don't.) So as I wrote, you can have a few robots at your store helping people out, for convenience and novelty, but if you're imagining a large department store filled with robots with almost no humans helping the public, forget it. That's never going to happen, no matter how much money it might eventually save.

 
Sure, until they make battery changing robots.
But who changes THEIR batteries....And THEIR batteries....and THEIR batteries.....*head explodes*

people will always prefer other people
Wanna bet? People generally suck. Bring on the drones.

We have a major crap storm headed our way in less than 20 years IMO. We are going to have lots of people and not many jobs. Then what?
Then what? The guy currently ambling around a Lowes wearing an apron who isn't much help when you need it can be re-classified/re-trained to monitor and maintain Lowes' new service-robot army. Someone will need to change the batteries and upgrade the software.
Robots are already, and will certainly be in the future, pretty much self repair and service. If anything comes up a robot will service the robot. There will be a relative handful of jobs involved in making sure everything is running smoothly but they aren't going to the former lumber section guy.
Sarcasm meter down?

Yeah, I get it. My point was....I don't really care. If I need to find a freaking garden weasel and three Lowes employees can't help me, but the robot can, I will happily let R5-D4 show me where it is. The thought "FFS! That ain't a person! It'll be anarchy!! Think of the children of the lumber guy!!" will never cross my mind. Hell, I may hop on top of the thing and ride it to the garden section like I'm in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade.
It's not necessarily the lumber guys kids and grand kids you should be concerned about, but your own.
Childless, so I guess I'm in the clear. *whew!*

Maybe folks can just...I dunno...urge their kid to aim higher than "Lowes Lumber Guy?"

(So, where's my hardware store-robot-parade-float-thingie again? I could use some 10 penny nails. Or maybe some new Sunbrella shades.)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I know that personally whenever I call customer service I always look forward to talking to the robot instead of a human. It always works out better. I'm sure this will be just as great.

 
I think you guys are missing my point a little bit. Why do people go to stores in the first place when they can buy just about anything they want on the internet these days and have it delivered to them, often for cheaper? Why do they go to the movies when they can simply watch television, and order whatever movie they want? Why do they go to public restaurants, when it is much cheaper to purchase the food you want at a market and prepare it yourself, or order it made and delivered?

The answer to all these questions, according to sociologists, is the same: because people enjoy human interaction. Most people like being in a crowd of other people (despite constant assertions that they don't.) So as I wrote, you can have a few robots at your store helping people out, for convenience and novelty, but if you're imagining a large department store filled with robots with almost no humans helping the public, forget it. That's never going to happen, no matter how much money it might eventually save.
Either:

A. I need the item now

2. I want to see the item in person before buying.

 
I think you guys are missing my point a little bit. Why do people go to stores in the first place when they can buy just about anything they want on the internet these days and have it delivered to them, often for cheaper? Why do they go to the movies when they can simply watch television, and order whatever movie they want? Why do they go to public restaurants, when it is much cheaper to purchase the food you want at a market and prepare it yourself, or order it made and delivered?

The answer to all these questions, according to sociologists, is the same: because people enjoy human interaction. Most people like being in a crowd of other people (despite constant assertions that they don't.) So as I wrote, you can have a few robots at your store helping people out, for convenience and novelty, but if you're imagining a large department store filled with robots with almost no humans helping the public, forget it. That's never going to happen, no matter how much money it might eventually save.
I think you are seriously mistaken. The last generation to be raised without ubiquitous tech in their lives from day one is ours. People are going to be raised around and become very comfortable with robots.

 
I also want to add that the fears that NC Commish is expressing here have been expressed consistently from the beginning of the industrial revolution with every new form of technology or automation. The tractor would destroy the jobs of farmers. The canals would destroy horse delivery men. The railroads would destroy the canals. And so forth. Every new technology that has been developed has been attacked, not as a job creator, but as a job destroyer, and the prediction that NC made in the OP, that we would end up with many more people than jobs, has been made on each occasion, and even when its been correct at times, that has always been transitory.

 
I figure they'll have a plug in the front near the battery port, and an outlet in the back, like a string of Christmas lights. Then the robots can line up in a train, plugging into the butt of the robot in front of them, and the second from the front can reach around and change the batteries on the very front robot until he's done. Then he can go to the back and they just cycle through until they're all charged up. Would be a lot of fun for the kids to watch.

 
I think a robot might be overkill for that. At places like Lowes and HD, I'd settle for some touch screen where I can enter what I want and it tells me Aisle 5, Shelf C, Bin 8. Ikea has that and I love it. Never understood why the other big box stores don't have it.
Not if the idea is to cut workers it isn't. Which is the ultimate end game.
Its the damn cotton gin all over again.

 
If we're talking about a Lowes where I would actually need to ask for help, I think I'd prefer a human. If we're talking about a Best Buy where I know what I'm going for, I'd prefer a robot to the teenager or early 20-something who's going to try to convince me to spend $500 on an extended warranty and a ####ty HDMI cable.

 
I also want to add that the fears that NC Commish is expressing here have been expressed consistently from the beginning of the industrial revolution with every new form of technology or automation. The tractor would destroy the jobs of farmers. The canals would destroy horse delivery men. The railroads would destroy the canals. And so forth. Every new technology that has been developed has been attacked, not as a job creator, but as a job destroyer, and the prediction that NC made in the OP, that we would end up with many more people than jobs, has been made on each occasion, and even when its been correct at times, that has always been transitory.
You do realize that all those things did exactly what they said they would. Let's take the legal industry. When I started in computers it took 2.5 workers to support an Attorney. Now it takes one worker per 2.5 attorneys. Have you looked at the drop in farm payrolls and the declining employment there of? Takes far fewer people to produce what you eat than it did. And those displaced people moved to manufacturing. Where they got displaced again by robots and moved to the service industry. This isn't the printing press. This is a fundamental societal change that is coming screaming down the tracks at us. And we are ignoring it.

 
I don't regard this as a concern. Robots are fine for behind the scenes jobs but when it comes to anything that involves human interaction, people will always prefer other people. A robot at a department store is an attraction; a novelty act. I don't believe it will ever be anything more than that.
So are you saying you'd rather go to a Home Depot than Lowes because HD has people?

I'd think you'd go to the place with the lower prices, as many/most Americans would. If these robots can help lower their prices (lower overhead), as well as be a novelty attractor, it could be a "win/win" for them as a company.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but for something like a HW store, for a significant portion of what people go there for (HW supplies) it doesn't really matter which store they go to, they go for convenience and location. You know "Hey I need some nails for this project. There is a HD, better stop." It is likely different for appliances and such. (Maybe paint) But most people aren't going to drive 20 miles out of the way for a robot, or not.

 
I figure they'll have a plug in the front near the battery port, and an outlet in the back, like a string of Christmas lights. Then the robots can line up in a train, plugging into the butt of the robot in front of them, and the second from the front can reach around and change the batteries on the very front robot until he's done. Then he can go to the back and they just cycle through until they're all charged up. Would be a lot of fun for the kids to watch.
Until one of them is accidentally run over.

 
I figure they'll have a plug in the front near the battery port, and an outlet in the back, like a string of Christmas lights. Then the robots can line up in a train, plugging into the butt of the robot in front of them, and the second from the front can reach around and change the batteries on the very front robot until he's done. Then he can go to the back and they just cycle through until they're all charged up. Would be a lot of fun for the kids to watch.
Now I'm starting to warm up to the idea.

 
I also want to add that the fears that NC Commish is expressing here have been expressed consistently from the beginning of the industrial revolution with every new form of technology or automation. The tractor would destroy the jobs of farmers. The canals would destroy horse delivery men. The railroads would destroy the canals. And so forth. Every new technology that has been developed has been attacked, not as a job creator, but as a job destroyer, and the prediction that NC made in the OP, that we would end up with many more people than jobs, has been made on each occasion, and even when its been correct at times, that has always been transitory.
You do realize that all those things did exactly what they said they would. Let's take the legal industry. When I started in computers it took 2.5 workers to support an Attorney. Now it takes one worker per 2.5 attorneys. Have you looked at the drop in farm payrolls and the declining employment there of? Takes far fewer people to produce what you eat than it did. And those displaced people moved to manufacturing. Where they got displaced again by robots and moved to the service industry. This isn't the printing press. This is a fundamental societal change that is coming screaming down the tracks at us. And we are ignoring it.
So what's the solution? Stopping technology just so Jimbo doesn't have to learn an actual skill and can instead just flip burgers or scan an item and ask if the customer wants an extended warranty isn't realistic.

 
I also want to add that the fears that NC Commish is expressing here have been expressed consistently from the beginning of the industrial revolution with every new form of technology or automation. The tractor would destroy the jobs of farmers. The canals would destroy horse delivery men. The railroads would destroy the canals. And so forth. Every new technology that has been developed has been attacked, not as a job creator, but as a job destroyer, and the prediction that NC made in the OP, that we would end up with many more people than jobs, has been made on each occasion, and even when its been correct at times, that has always been transitory.
You do realize that all those things did exactly what they said they would. Let's take the legal industry. When I started in computers it took 2.5 workers to support an Attorney. Now it takes one worker per 2.5 attorneys. Have you looked at the drop in farm payrolls and the declining employment there of? Takes far fewer people to produce what you eat than it did. And those displaced people moved to manufacturing. Where they got displaced again by robots and moved to the service industry. This isn't the printing press. This is a fundamental societal change that is coming screaming down the tracks at us. And we are ignoring it.
Yes, you're correct; some of these changes were fundamental. Lots of people were hurt. But in terms of the overall impact of society, the chaos and collapse that experts predicted each time never happened. Neither did the dehumanization that was depicted so brilliantly in Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times. We are still here, and we will be when robots get smarter.

 
I also want to add that the fears that NC Commish is expressing here have been expressed consistently from the beginning of the industrial revolution with every new form of technology or automation. The tractor would destroy the jobs of farmers. The canals would destroy horse delivery men. The railroads would destroy the canals. And so forth. Every new technology that has been developed has been attacked, not as a job creator, but as a job destroyer, and the prediction that NC made in the OP, that we would end up with many more people than jobs, has been made on each occasion, and even when its been correct at times, that has always been transitory.
You do realize that all those things did exactly what they said they would. Let's take the legal industry. When I started in computers it took 2.5 workers to support an Attorney. Now it takes one worker per 2.5 attorneys. Have you looked at the drop in farm payrolls and the declining employment there of? Takes far fewer people to produce what you eat than it did. And those displaced people moved to manufacturing. Where they got displaced again by robots and moved to the service industry. This isn't the printing press. This is a fundamental societal change that is coming screaming down the tracks at us. And we are ignoring it.
So what's the solution? Stopping technology just so Jimbo doesn't have to learn an actual skill and can instead just flip burgers or scan an item and ask if the customer wants an extended warranty isn't realistic.
The average IQ in this country is 98. That means an awful lot of people aren't that smart. They aren't going to become engineers or even high tech workers. We will always have a lot of Jimbos. I have suggested that we will need to tax corporations pretty heavily as they will have all the money anyway and institute a Basic Income Guarantee for people like Jimbo and really all of us. It doesn't matter what you do there is already a robot that can do it better or there is one being built that will.

 
Anecdotal, but I always have trouble finding someone to help me at Lowes.

 
I also want to add that the fears that NC Commish is expressing here have been expressed consistently from the beginning of the industrial revolution with every new form of technology or automation. The tractor would destroy the jobs of farmers. The canals would destroy horse delivery men. The railroads would destroy the canals. And so forth. Every new technology that has been developed has been attacked, not as a job creator, but as a job destroyer, and the prediction that NC made in the OP, that we would end up with many more people than jobs, has been made on each occasion, and even when its been correct at times, that has always been transitory.
You do realize that all those things did exactly what they said they would. Let's take the legal industry. When I started in computers it took 2.5 workers to support an Attorney. Now it takes one worker per 2.5 attorneys. Have you looked at the drop in farm payrolls and the declining employment there of? Takes far fewer people to produce what you eat than it did. And those displaced people moved to manufacturing. Where they got displaced again by robots and moved to the service industry. This isn't the printing press. This is a fundamental societal change that is coming screaming down the tracks at us. And we are ignoring it.
So what's the solution? Stopping technology just so Jimbo doesn't have to learn an actual skill and can instead just flip burgers or scan an item and ask if the customer wants an extended warranty isn't realistic.
The average IQ in this country is 98. That means an awful lot of people aren't that smart. They aren't going to become engineers or even high tech workers. We will always have a lot of Jimbos. I have suggested that we will need to tax corporations pretty heavily as they will have all the money anyway and institute a Basic Income Guarantee for people like Jimbo and really all of us. It doesn't matter what you do there is already a robot that can do it better or there is one being built that will.
So we tax MegaCorp so that Jimbo can sit on his ### and have enough money? That's your solution?

 
Because the Big Box stores dont always put that merchandise where its supposed to be. I purchased a new grill from Lowe's through their website two Friday's ago. I set it up for in store pick up as it was the last one left. I went to pick it up the next day. I had already called to confirm it was in stock and to see if they could assemble it for me. It was in stock but they couldnt assemble it by the next day. So I go in that Saturday to pick up the grill and suddenly its nowhere to be found. It wasnt picked and staged for me to pick up and suddenly it was lost. They were going to give me a different grill at a significant discount. I was in a bind and needed that grill for an event the next day. After waiting for them to bring me the alternate grill for what seemed like an eternity the stock boy returns and miraculously has found the grill I orginally ordered.

The Lowes Bot might not have helped me in this case. But it seems it might be helpful in some instances where the employees are inept.
A robot can do a better job of scanning the entire store all day and remembering where items are.

 
I also want to add that the fears that NC Commish is expressing here have been expressed consistently from the beginning of the industrial revolution with every new form of technology or automation. The tractor would destroy the jobs of farmers. The canals would destroy horse delivery men. The railroads would destroy the canals. And so forth. Every new technology that has been developed has been attacked, not as a job creator, but as a job destroyer, and the prediction that NC made in the OP, that we would end up with many more people than jobs, has been made on each occasion, and even when its been correct at times, that has always been transitory.
You do realize that all those things did exactly what they said they would. Let's take the legal industry. When I started in computers it took 2.5 workers to support an Attorney. Now it takes one worker per 2.5 attorneys. Have you looked at the drop in farm payrolls and the declining employment there of? Takes far fewer people to produce what you eat than it did. And those displaced people moved to manufacturing. Where they got displaced again by robots and moved to the service industry. This isn't the printing press. This is a fundamental societal change that is coming screaming down the tracks at us. And we are ignoring it.
So what's the solution? Stopping technology just so Jimbo doesn't have to learn an actual skill and can instead just flip burgers or scan an item and ask if the customer wants an extended warranty isn't realistic.
The average IQ in this country is 98. That means an awful lot of people aren't that smart. They aren't going to become engineers or even high tech workers. We will always have a lot of Jimbos. I have suggested that we will need to tax corporations pretty heavily as they will have all the money anyway and institute a Basic Income Guarantee for people like Jimbo and really all of us. It doesn't matter what you do there is already a robot that can do it better or there is one being built that will.
So we tax MegaCorp so that Jimbo can sit on his ### and have enough money? That's your solution?
Or I guess they can starve to death in the street. And since so many will be unemployed with no money there won't be any Megacorp either. No demand, no reason for supply. Oh and at some point it may well be that nearly all of us are Jimbo before all is said and done.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top