Robots Taking Human Jobs

[Endy0816]

I'm of the opinion the amount of total work will increase until the economics balance. Humans in the service/arts/science sectors, robots in manufacturing.

 

Main issue is transitioning the workforce. Similar to the problem outsourcing poses.

[samanagha]

well japan is really doing good in robotics

 

 

 

<link removed by mod>

[Tridimity]

well japan is really doing good in robotics

 

 

 

<link removed by mod>

 

But no so well in the fertility stakes, according to reports from the BBC:

 

In a world where people panic about the rising global population, Japan is facing a very different future which could see their population shrink by a third in just 40 years. One reason is that the Japanese are not having enough babies and the causes of that form the basis of Anita Rani's intriguing journey.

Part of a season of programmes on population for This World, No Sex Please, We're Japanese explores Otaku culture - the world of nerds and geeks obsessed with computer games and Manga cartoons - which has led to a withdrawal of many Japanese men from the whole dating game. Anita meets two men in their late thirties who have in depth relationships with virtual teenage girlfriends as part of a role playing game: 'I think twice about going out with a 3D woman', says one.

The Japanese have far less sex than other nations and Anita also meets the women who struggle to work and have children in a society still dominated by traditional gender roles. Added to this, Japan also has the oldest population in the world, 25% are over 65 and 50,000 over a hundred years old. Anita visits a group of pensioners cheerleaders and a prison with a wing especially designed for pensioners. Too few young people to pay tax, too many old people needing support - it has all led to a debt problem worse than that of Greece and an uncertain future for a country that still is the third largest economy in the world.

 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03fh0bg/This_World_No_Sex_Please_Were_Japanese/

 

Although I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the report

[overtone]

 

 

I'm of the opinion the amount of total work will increase until the economics balance. Humans in the service/arts/science sectors, robots in manufacturing

That will double the return to capital, and halve the return to labof (service jobs suck, wages and hours and working conditions and all). The only way to "balance" things would be heavy taxes on the return to capital - otherwise, the economy polarizes into rich and poor.

[Mr Monkeybat]

Even service jobs are under threat there will soon be bar tending robots that can recognize all the bottles and precisely pour any cocktail you want. For the a capital cost the same price as a bartenders annual salary.

[Wallesteino]

Hi guys, I am new at the forum

 

this particoular topic catches my attention as I am an admirer of the Zeitgeist movement (http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/ for who is not familiar with it) and there is a lot of talking on robots around the resource based economy that the movement promotes.

 

Have you ever consider the fact that the advanced developement of robots as the supermachines that will replace human labor would be perfect to satisfy the basic needs of life and eliminate dependence from work?

 

Think of food, clothes and shelters that robots could make to perfection without the need to rest... It is true that there isn`t the need of having as much engineers to manage the robots as the labourers that are being replaced, but if the society will be structured so that there will be more engineers working just few hours a day there will be space to absorb everyone in and we will all benefit of the free time we will have....

[EdEarl]

Hi guys, I am new at the forum

 

this particoular topic catches my attention as I am an admirer of the Zeitgeist movement (http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/ for who is not familiar with it) and there is a lot of talking on robots around the resource based economy that the movement promotes.

 

Have you ever consider the fact that the advanced developement of robots as the supermachines that will replace human labor would be perfect to satisfy the basic needs of life and eliminate dependence from work?

 

Think of food, clothes and shelters that robots could make to perfection without the need to rest... It is true that there isn`t the need of having as much engineers to manage the robots as the labourers that are being replaced, but if the society will be structured so that there will be more engineers working just few hours a day there will be space to absorb everyone in and we will all benefit of the free time we will have....

It is possible that robots may one day be capable of providing human necessities of food, clothing, shelter and health care. However, that assumes that people who own land for growing food, for reaping resources for clothing and shelter, and owners of patents for medicine and robots will allow the resources to be used for the public good. It is possible robots will be used to police resources and prevent people from having necessities.

[Tridimity]

The only way to "balance" things would be heavy taxes on the return to capital - otherwise, the economy polarizes into rich and poor.

 

 

Right on, overtone. The UK is currently "officially" recovering but the reality is that the recoveries for big business and for ordinary working families have become divorced. Ed Miliband seems to be the only leading politician to recognise this fact and to care enough (whether he cares merely as a vote-winning strategy or whether he actually cares in his heart of hearts, I am not sure, but I think it is the latter) whereas Cameron is prepared to make a token gesture and question the energy "big six" and allow rail fares to increase by only (only?) 6.1%. And so the disparity between wealthy and lower-middle/working/dependent classes increases... and increases... and increases...

[HalfWit]

I hear the blacksmiths have been put out of business by these newfangled automobiles.

[Wallesteino]

I think the world with the robots that we all think of must be reconsidered outside the current system we live in.

If the robots are really to take over what is done by men, society will have to be reinvented, and most probably many things that we now use and businesses that we now have won`t be necessary anymore as they are.. Think about the car that replaces the horse... the stable owner in busy cities and the car factories that incorporate his workforce...

[EdEarl]

I think the world with the robots that we all think of must be reconsidered outside the current system we live in.

If the robots are really to take over what is done by men, society will have to be reinvented, and most probably many things that we now use and businesses that we now have won`t be necessary anymore as they are.. Think about the car that replaces the horse... the stable owner in busy cities and the car factories that incorporate his workforce...

You may be right; I hope is is not violent.

[Mr Monkeybat]

A future world where all work is done by robots and humans live a life of leisure does have its appeal (though some will find this creepy and disagree). But even if we all agree such a world is both possible and desirable it still leaves open the question, how do we manage the transition? For it seems unlikely that all jobs will be automated at once. Instead certain jobs are automated creating a larger class of unemployed while people in harder to automate jobs will continue working vus require the continuation of the monetary economy and property, these people will probably resent the taxes necessary to fund ever growing numbers of "lazy" unemployment beneficiaries.

 

For the foreseeable future automation will not benefit those employees who it relieves of work, but only the employers who saves on wages due to his investment. So capitol becomes ever more powerful than labor.

[enigmalepial]

I suppose that is part of the process .. maybe not now but it will happen in the next few years .. http://lepial.blogspot.com/

[EdEarl]

A future world where all work is done by robots and humans live a life of leisure does have its appeal (though some will find this creepy and disagree). But even if we all agree such a world is both possible and desirable it still leaves open the question, how do we manage the transition? For it seems unlikely that all jobs will be automated at once. Instead certain jobs are automated creating a larger class of unemployed while people in harder to automate jobs will continue working vus require the continuation of the monetary economy and property, these people will probably resent the taxes necessary to fund ever growing numbers of "lazy" unemployment beneficiaries.

 

For the foreseeable future automation will not benefit those employees who it relieves of work, but only the employers who saves on wages due to his investment. So capitol becomes ever more powerful than labor.

I think there is a high probability of a chaotic period in the not too distant future, when humanity will be very stressed because of global warming and many will die. If a technological society survives that period or not is uncertain. The Fermi Paradox asks, "Why have we not discovered an alien civilization?" One answer is that technological civilizations destroy themselves (or a cosmic catastrophe) before they achieve space travel and replicator robots. At the moment we cannot say we will not destroy ourselves before replicators, and the Fermi Paradox seems to say it is likely technological society will not survive long enough. I hope otherwise, but our gluttony for oil, coal, gold, booze, crack, smack, and weapons of mass destruction are bad omens.

 

If we survive this chaotic period or if it does not occur, distribution of robotic helpers seems assured.

 

Edited December 4, 2013 by EdEarl

[EdEarl]

 

phys.org

 

Advances in artificial intelligence and robotics mean that machines will soon be able to do many of the tasks of today's workers. And not just blue collar jobs in areas such as manufacturing, but even in such white collar occupations as lawyers, doctors and – gulp – journalists.

 

Society will adapt; hopefully to benefit all men.

 

Perhaps people will begin to see imperfections in manually crafted things as attractive, and machine made perfection less desirable. Although, that may mean businesses will change products to add variations in machine made things. No doubt, art will remain the domain of man for a long time. It seems unlikely machines will master art, even if they master engineering and science.

[fiveworlds]

art will remain the domain of man for a long time

 

wrong unfortunately

 

Society will adapt; hopefully to benefit all men.

 

Not here robots do most of the work. The country hasn't changed its ways with massive unemployment rates. Unemployed people don't get paid enough to live on. Even farmers might get hit with the driverless tractors http://www.fwi.co.uk/articles/23/01/2014/142566/does-the-future-lie-in-robots-or-driverless-tractors.htm

You can't even work in computers because most people can't afford the servers.

Edited September 2, 2014 by fiveworlds

[EdEarl]

IMO art requires innovation that does not exist in eDavid's work; however, eDavid is a work of art. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

[kristalris]

Gulp lawyers as well? Well indeed if you want a legal system whereby the judge / jury is purely objective that can be had today. It would work a bit like the execution "photo booth" they had in the DDR or GDR German Democratic Republic. The person to be shot thought a photo would be taken smiled and was shot in the head. More human BTW than having to wait years on death row for an injection.

 

You simply add a computer with a speech type and Google translate system. And you have a lie-detector test. You subsequently ask witnesses and suspects the computer generated questions on basis of input by the police (Robocop) and the law is digitally provided by the lawmaker. Well you either get acquitted or receive immediate verdict, for what could go wrong? Shot in the head to getting a fine or jail sentence. Very objective. lying witnesses as well of course have swift justice administered.

 

Judges in the Netherlands are more and more acting like robots anyway, hence the confusion by some that it is best taken over by robots.

 

All humans need a basic income all over the world anyway IMO and this is one of the extra reasons to do that asap.

[fiveworlds]

IMO art requires innovation that does not exist in eDavid's work;

 

A finite amount of innovation.

[Ten oz]

The more robots do the more humans are free to do other things. In a world where peole do everything for themselves there is not much free time for invention or exploration. As machines take on more work people will be free to create new markets and new types of jobs. This has already played out many times over.

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Similar threads merged

[Phi for All]

You simply add a computer with a speech type and Google translate system. And you have a lie-detector test. You subsequently ask witnesses and suspects the computer generated questions on basis of input by the police (Robocop) and the law is digitally provided by the lawmaker. Well you either get acquitted or receive immediate verdict, for what could go wrong? Shot in the head to getting a fine or jail sentence. Very objective. lying witnesses as well of course have swift justice administered.

 

This doesn't increase objectivity, and adds a factor nobody wants in the legal system, miscommunication. Take the above quote and run it through Google Translate into any other language you know, and you'll see what could go wrong. Translation programs don't yet have the sophistication for use in areas full of nuance.

[physica]

We have to think about other areas apart from manufacturing and agriculture. Healthcare has boomed. Because diagnostics can be achieved with less skilled personnel due to more accurate biomarkers and scanning equipment loads of technician jobs in biophysics, radiology and community services has increased. We now focus on preventative medicine. I work in emergency medicine and a fairly uneducated technician can diagnose a heart attack fairly easily if they follow guidelines, take the bloods that get printed out when you type in chest pain on the computer and read what the computer says about the ecg reading. Neurology doctors needed to examine a patient and offer a limited range of treatments if they thought a patient had a stroke, now a paramedic can follow procedure and the patient gets rushed for a head scan, has this reduced the task for neurology doctors? no, now we can tell what type of stroke it is so they come down to infuse IV thromolysis drug if it's ischemic.

 

Police has also become more diverse with different technicians playing a role. In-fact whole internet squads have been formed for internet evidence.

 

What technology does is encourage industry to educate the poor. As machines generally waste less materials and are cheaper to run production. Corporations will not just sit there and stagnate. Their own greed will encourage them to innovate at a fast rate. They will see the financial benefit to educate their workers more and invest in more research and development. If not they will fall to those who do. Samsung needs electrical engineers. They recently set up an electrical engineering academies in South Africa, Kenya and Nigeria with the need to produce 10,000 electronics engineers as it is cheaper to educate and train natives than continue to ship in educated westerners for the ever increasing technology.

 

As we've seen in the increasing prevalence of cars a new industry will develop. You will get people who will make their money from salvaging old mechanical machines and repairing them, you will get second hand machine dealers. Machines give independent small start up companies more of a chance to deliver services. Family businesses are no longer invisible thanks to the internet. I can buy a light spectroscopy kit for $50 and my desktop pc is strong enough to run it, I can test for compounds in water. Something like this 10 years ago would have cost 10s of thousands. Here is a great clip from an article:

 

"At least since Karl Marx, people have been predicting that technology would create mass unemployment. However, these predictions were consistently wrong because they ignored the offsetting benefits of automation. For example, during the 19thcentury, machines took over tasks performed by weavers, eliminating 98 percent of the labor needed to weave a yard of cloth. But this mechanization also brought a benefit: It sharply reduced the price of cloth, so people consumed much more. Greater demand for cloth meant that the number of textile jobs quadrupled despite the automation.

Something similar is happening in quite a few occupations today. Because ATMs perform many teller transactions, fewer tellers are needed to operate a bank branch. But because it costs less to operate a branch office, banks dramatically increased the number of branches in order to reach a bigger market. More bank branches means more tellers, despite fewer tellers per branch.

Although ATM technology did not eliminate bank tellers, it did change the way tellers work and the skills they require. They now perform relatively fewer simple transactions in favor of complex ones, and they provide the personal service that is an important part of “relationship banking.” When technology eliminates some tasks involved in a job, it makes remaining, related tasks more valuable. Sometimes this greater value can create job growth."

 

http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/03/how-technology-creates-jobs-for-less-educated-workers/

 

Everywhere I look technology is a liberator. Anyone with internet access can look at educational material that only a few of the elite would see when attending university 70 years ago. Blaming loss of jobs due to technology runs along the same lines as blaming immigrants for loss of jobs. These claims are rarely backed up by any evidence and are usually shouted by people who have their own insecurities to deal with.

 

I believe that we live in the most exciting time that this world has offered yet.

Edited September 3, 2014 by physica

[kristalris]

 

This doesn't increase objectivity, and adds a factor nobody wants in the legal system, miscommunication. Take the above quote and run it through Google Translate into any other language you know, and you'll see what could go wrong. Translation programs don't yet have the sophistication for use in areas full of nuance.

I fully agree with you. I was using irony. I'm strongly opposed to this use even of lie-detectors for they can be manipulated. Law is for people by people.

[Fuzzwood]

Edited September 5, 2014 by Fuzzwood