First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply The 4th industrial revolution isn't going to be resolved like the previous three
1646 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Canada, Toronto
Offline
Posted 8/14/17 , edited 8/14/17

nanikore2 wrote:

Machines are already taking white collar jobs in many fields. Jobs of some fub-level integrated circuit (silicon chip) layout designers are being displaced by PNR tools, and soon cell-level designers too. After that, circuit design engineers will be next...

All the talk about new jobs being created is bullshit. People are not just going to be shoveled en masse to the next level of abstraction in the process, and once the very top of the pyramids vanish then what? No more architects, design administrators so everyone gets to be CEOs?

No... executives like CEOs are not irreplaceable themselves. Arguably expert systems could be more competent at running corporations than quite a few of those overpaid pathological jackasses.

Hopefully I won't be around when the mass disruptions around massive unemployment happens. Some people expect the socioeconomic problems to magically vanish but I don't. The difference between this and the previous industrial revolutions is that this one reaches the very highest levels of abstraction; moving workers up the skill trees won't work anymore. The talk around retraining becomes empty.

"Most people just stop working and do what they want! Relax!" is a common quip.

Unfortunately it's not going to be that simple or peaceful. For some people today it's already not that simple.


In theory, the machine would take blue collar jobs before they take white collar jobs. However, the blue collar jobs is not yet taken over by machine because the transnational corporate had set up NGOs that force the third world citizen to work under long hours, harsh condition, and very low wage so the third world countries would attract criminal investors by foreign business; the exploitable third world workers is preventing the blue collar jobs from being replaced by machine so I would not believe that job displacement by machine is inevitable. The current trend is that jobs require more skills but not because of displacement by machine; it is due to the displacement by enslaved workers in the third world so there must be more to the story than machine takeover.

In another topic, I already heard reports of machine making life more miserable but not because they take jobs; the machine is used to create a high-level survailence in the workplace so the CEOs can enforce a stronger totalitarian rule. This greater survailence is being counteracted by allowing more democratic decision making. However, the property owners are preventing this democracy in workplace with dictatorship by property ownership.


PumaConcolor wrote:

There's not a point in having all those machines if people can't buy the stuff they make, so either we'll find new jobs or the system finally fully collapses (keep in mind we are already in a worldwide crises for this issue. There are A LOT of countries facing the same problems, with products and brands disappearing due to the fucked economy - though baby boomers insist it's the avocado toast's fault)

I like capitalism (honestly it's shit and I'm aware I only like it because I'm one of the people who isn't getting completely fucked by it), but I don't think it'll hold much longer. Probably I won't live see the new system though. It'll take time to come up with a good economical plan that can be applied globally, keeping capitalism advantages but solving it's problems.


I had debate with Capitalists before and learn that some Capitalists consider mixed economy as Capitalist even when those mixed economy lead toward Socialism; some Capitalists are boosting about Capitalism by claiming that Capitalism have enough Socialist elements to counteract the flaws of Capitalism. There is also the inconsistence of the Neo-Liberal Capitalists: they support international trade without government intervention but create many NGOs that control international trade as de facto transnational governments. Those NGOs act as transnational government so they could counteract the flaws of Capitalism on the global scale but those NGOs are controlled by large transnational corporate and corrupt government officers who serve the interest of the ruling class. The Neo-Liberal could use the media to indirectly confuse the interest of the ruling class as the interest of the common citizen to give credibility to crony Capitalism but their propaganda is now falling apart.
1546 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 8/14/17 , edited 8/14/17
I'm pretty sure I remember arguing with Ryu and Judar about this somewhere before. Anyway, obviously, we'll eventually reach a tipping point, where everything goes to shit, or we rebuild our economy and conception of jobs from scratch. I have no idea how there could be anything like a seamless transition (there probably can't), but my take is that in the future we will all be teachers, tour guides, and researchers. Crowd science and other large-manpower projects will be refined and expanded, people would host classes to teach hobbies and skills, and we would be involved in learning and passing on the history of things in our areas of life.
14725 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Houma
Offline
Posted 8/14/17 , edited 8/14/17
I'll make sure to have 500lbs of food and 26 friends/family to do all the village work when we have a complete socioeconomic systems collapse dawning a new dark age. My Castle Rush will be ready!
Humms 
14155 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / CAN, ON
Offline
Posted 8/14/17 , edited 8/14/17
Someone makes those decisions, just remember that.

It's good to be happy though, less time worrying about something, more time worrying about being happy.

Fuck the economy, we've been dealing with debt our whole existence, and in the end doing more harm than good.

Poor life choices, I like to think everyone has made some of their own, but to constantly see it over and over again you realize how predictability becomes a sequence.

People will buy into anything they are told to buy. Money makes you everything. It makes your education, your hobbies, your ranking in life( or at least a nice spot on the news)

Why not have a robot do everything? Aren't you tired of living life yet don't you just want to have life at your fingertips instead of discovering it yourself?
31423 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
51
Offline
Posted 8/14/17 , edited 8/14/17
Machines need to be maintained so there will be a job for that. Even if you make a machine that maintains those machines, that machine needs to be maintained somehow, and someone has to be a supervisor for it all in the case of glitches. Well, a reduction in jobs is still inevitable I suppose.

Until true AI is invented (which I don't believe is possible at all), I'm not worried about jobs that require creativity, reacting to emergencies, or interpreting context. AI as it is now cannot handle those well, though I think we may be pretty close to replacing some minor service jobs with machines like being a clerk.
37920 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 8/14/17 , edited 8/14/17
I think we will be alright, but things could get very ugly before we figure it all out. The disruption is happening gradually. You won't just wake up one day a decade from now and see massive unemployment. It's going to be a slow, gradual change. Hopefully our society can keep up.
20208 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 8/14/17 , edited 8/15/17

Cydoemus wrote:

Like many have said: it will eventually reach a point of saturation.
If the consumer cannot purchase the goods that are being made through sheer automation, there isn't much purpose in keeping said automation going.
Although, I cannot say (with confidence) that there won't be any jobs even in this "automated world" that the OP is projecting.
Automated systems are not without failure, nor do I believe there will ever be a time that they'll be faultless.
This would mean that careers would likely become focused on social aspects (human-to-human interactions; such as law [police, lawyers, ...] or medical [doctors, psychiatrists, ...]) and STEM (science [chemists, biologists, ...], tech industry [repairs, upkeep, programming, ...], and so forth).

The unemployment will spike simply because people aren't trained or qualified to handle a drastic shift to the aforementioned fields.
There are so many people who are still surviving in the "blue collar" world of careers that will likely lose the vast majority of their positions once we automate their jobs as a whole.
These individuals would have to bank on their experience to become "consultants" for firms that are focusing around said automation - to confirm the fallacies and nuances of the job that an automated program or machine wouldn't naturally foresee without additional adjustments.
Of course, this would be a minute amount of positions as there wouldn't be that many companies focusing on automation of a specific field (say, construction).
I'd imagine this is where some engineers would shine for a brief period of time (20-50 years post-automated apocalypse).

It'll be resolved, one way or another.
Either the people will revolt or society will adjust.
There is no pleasure without pain.
As Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès had said about what he had done during the French Revolution, "J'ai vécu." (I survived.)


I think everyone is overestimating how fast full automation is. For instance, self-flying planes or some would say drones. Still needs an operator and still needs a mechanic. Society slowly transitions and adapts when more technology arises.

As our nation's IQ increases so is the education required for jobs. It took geniuses to figure out Calculus, now an average 17 year old in modern day America is able to fully grasp those concepts as it if it was a child's play thing.

Computers gave us a plethora of different jobs. AIs might be the new technology that bring us a new set of different jobs.

Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I feel we as don't give credit to our nation as much as we would like. Like most people don't know that America actually owns about 41% of the global wealth.

Plus AIs aren't able to create awesome anime yet. Or would it...
2094 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / PA, USA
Offline
Posted 8/15/17 , edited 8/15/17
Programming, engineering, mechanical, and electrical will flourish. Machinery are really like children; they're perfectly fine for a while, then one of them has a trantrum or emotional breakdown over pretty random shit.
33526 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Online
Posted 8/15/17 , edited 8/16/17

Ranwolf wrote:

Meh until they build a decent combat bot my job is in no danger. As for white collar types, fuck 'em they always act so damn superior anyway. If a bot can deliver a better product for cheaper who cares if a few white collar types bite the dust.


Most people who work ARE "white collar types".



Picture this. Go to any university graduation ceremony where people are getting their 4-year degrees.

There's your "white collar types".


Cydoemus wrote:


Either the people will revolt or society will adjust.


I'm a cynic so I'll just say that when the poor masses revolt, the rich would just build bigger walls and hire more guards (...and/or buy more security drones)

Increased automation increases the gap between the rich and the poor, and at the same time increase the number of people ending up poor.

The owners would be reaping all the resources and riches from the increased automation without releasing the riches back. This is the one thing I expect to remain through all the industrial revolutions. The circle of the well-to-do gets smaller and richer, while the masses of the poor grow larger and poorer at the same time.


encrypted12345 wrote:

Machines need to be maintained so there will be a job for that. Even if you make a machine that maintains those machines, that machine needs to be maintained somehow, and someone has to be a supervisor for it all in the case of glitches. Well, a reduction in jobs is still inevitable I suppose.


Machines could be maintained by people supervising machines which in turn maintain.

While it is true that "there is still going to be job X", the catch is that it would take much less people to do job X.

Let's say for a given line of work in a particular company, now you need about 400 people. With future automation reducing the requirement to just 4 people, what's going to happen to the rest of the 396? Those people are not suddenly all going to move to some other job, because all these other jobs are going to be experiencing similar things. Now, do that with the sum of ALL jobs.


Cardamom_Ginger wrote:

Programming, engineering, mechanical, and electrical will flourish. Machinery are really like children; they're perfectly fine for a while, then one of them has a trantrum or emotional breakdown over pretty random shit.


There's a really big catch. See my reply to encrypted12345 above.
36281 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Cloud 9.
Offline
Posted 8/16/17 , edited 8/16/17
Personally, I think most things should be automated. It would give us humans more time to be creative and indulge in what we're supposed to do, creating art. More musicians, more dancers, more wood workers, more craftsmen, more art. I'm cool with that. Humans need to slow their roll and take it easy. Too many stressed out bozos out here worrying about being late to work, or their next appointment, rushing around everywhere without taking time to smell the roses. I mean honestly, I worked IT for 7 years and it's a brainless boring ass job that I would rather have a computer do instead of me anyways.

It's just my daydreamer opinion though.
33526 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Online
Posted 8/16/17 , edited 8/16/17

sinoakayumi wrote:

In theory, the machine would take blue collar jobs before they take white collar jobs. However, the blue collar jobs is not yet taken over by machine because the transnational corporate had set up NGOs that force the third world citizen to work under long hours, harsh condition, and very low wage so the third world countries would attract criminal investors by foreign business; the exploitable third world workers is preventing the blue collar jobs from being replaced by machine so I would not believe that job displacement by machine is inevitable. The current trend is that jobs require more skills but not because of displacement by machine; it is due to the displacement by enslaved workers in the third world so there must be more to the story than machine takeover.



...That's blue-collar work.

When engineering design work that's off-shored to, say, India, come "back" into machines sitting in data centers housing rows of compute servers, those designers in India aren't going to be working either.

We are talking about jobs where it takes people to think. When the thinking is able to be abstracted algorithmically, it'd be a whole lot cheaper than any human being, off shore or otherwise.


spensaur wrote:

Personally, I think most things should be automated. It would give us humans more time to be creative and indulge in what we're supposed to do, creating art. More musicians, more dancers, more wood workers, more craftsmen, more art. I'm cool with that. Humans need to slow their roll and take it easy. Too many stressed out bozos out here worrying about being late to work, or their next appointment, rushing around everywhere without taking time to smell the roses. I mean honestly, I worked IT for 7 years and it's a brainless boring ass job that I would rather have a computer do instead of me anyways.

It's just my daydreamer opinion though.


Rich people will be taking it easy. The poor would not only going to be even poorer, they'd have their opportunity out of squalor taken away to boot.

"You don't have a job and you can't eat? Meh. I have mine. I'll give you some if I feel like it. Otherwise, scram." - The Rich, Then Now and Always
6103 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M
Offline
Posted 8/16/17 , edited 8/16/17

spensaur wrote:

Personally, I think most things should be automated. It would give us humans more time to be creative and indulge in what we're supposed to do, creating art. More musicians, more dancers, more wood workers, more craftsmen, more art. I'm cool with that. Humans need to slow their roll and take it easy. Too many stressed out bozos out here worrying about being late to work, or their next appointment, rushing around everywhere without taking time to smell the roses. I mean honestly, I worked IT for 7 years and it's a brainless boring ass job that I would rather have a computer do instead of me anyways.

It's just my daydreamer opinion though.


I agree with you that most things should be automated, but the whole idea about machine taking over your job is that you would still want to get the money instead of being jobless. And that is what the whole argument is about. If the company is replacing you with a computer, you should still get paid. Same goes for the rest of us who's jobs been covered by a computer. If you are the one who came up with the automated system, sure, but if you intend to sell it, the other people would also go out of job and result in you getting paid for their losses. Would you pay those people?
33526 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Online
Posted 8/16/17 , edited 8/16/17

fredreload wrote:


spensaur wrote:

Personally, I think most things should be automated. It would give us humans more time to be creative and indulge in what we're supposed to do, creating art. More musicians, more dancers, more wood workers, more craftsmen, more art. I'm cool with that. Humans need to slow their roll and take it easy. Too many stressed out bozos out here worrying about being late to work, or their next appointment, rushing around everywhere without taking time to smell the roses. I mean honestly, I worked IT for 7 years and it's a brainless boring ass job that I would rather have a computer do instead of me anyways.

It's just my daydreamer opinion though.


I agree with you that most things should be automated, but the whole idea about machine taking over your job is that you would still want to get the money instead of being jobless. And that is what the whole argument is about. If the company is replacing you with a computer, you should still get paid. Same goes for the rest of us who's jobs been covered by a computer


The company would see no reason to pay someone who is not working.

I saw the thread regarding commissioned salary. The thing about that is, if there is no work, there is no commission either...
36281 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Cloud 9.
Offline
Posted 8/16/17 , edited 8/16/17

nanikore2 wrote:


sinoakayumi wrote:

In theory, the machine would take blue collar jobs before they take white collar jobs. However, the blue collar jobs is not yet taken over by machine because the transnational corporate had set up NGOs that force the third world citizen to work under long hours, harsh condition, and very low wage so the third world countries would attract criminal investors by foreign business; the exploitable third world workers is preventing the blue collar jobs from being replaced by machine so I would not believe that job displacement by machine is inevitable. The current trend is that jobs require more skills but not because of displacement by machine; it is due to the displacement by enslaved workers in the third world so there must be more to the story than machine takeover.



...That's blue-collar work.

When engineering design work that's off-shored to, say, India, come "back" into machines sitting in data centers housing rows of compute servers, those designers in India aren't going to be working either.

We are talking about jobs where it takes people to think. When the thinking is able to be abstracted algorithmically, it'd be a whole lot cheaper than any human being, off shore or otherwise.


spensaur wrote:

Personally, I think most things should be automated. It would give us humans more time to be creative and indulge in what we're supposed to do, creating art. More musicians, more dancers, more wood workers, more craftsmen, more art. I'm cool with that. Humans need to slow their roll and take it easy. Too many stressed out bozos out here worrying about being late to work, or their next appointment, rushing around everywhere without taking time to smell the roses. I mean honestly, I worked IT for 7 years and it's a brainless boring ass job that I would rather have a computer do instead of me anyways.

It's just my daydreamer opinion though.


Rich people will be taking it easy. The poor would not only going to be even poorer, they'd have their opportunity out of squalor taken away to boot.

"You don't have a job and you can't eat? Meh. I have mine. I'll give you some if I feel like it. Otherwise, scram." - The Rich, Then Now and Always


The rich buy expensive art. The poor make beautiful art. I don't see the problem. Not to mention, the rich are getting richer with the current situation anyways. Having a robot take my job frees me from the slavery.
36281 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Cloud 9.
Offline
Posted 8/16/17 , edited 8/16/17

fredreload wrote:


spensaur wrote:

Personally, I think most things should be automated. It would give us humans more time to be creative and indulge in what we're supposed to do, creating art. More musicians, more dancers, more wood workers, more craftsmen, more art. I'm cool with that. Humans need to slow their roll and take it easy. Too many stressed out bozos out here worrying about being late to work, or their next appointment, rushing around everywhere without taking time to smell the roses. I mean honestly, I worked IT for 7 years and it's a brainless boring ass job that I would rather have a computer do instead of me anyways.

It's just my daydreamer opinion though.


I agree with you that most things should be automated, but the whole idea about machine taking over your job is that you would still want to get the money instead of being jobless. And that is what the whole argument is about. If the company is replacing you with a computer, you should still get paid. Same goes for the rest of us who's jobs been covered by a computer. If you are the one who came up with the automated system, sure, but if you intend to sell it, the other people would also go out of job and result in you getting paid for their losses. Would you pay those people?


Well there in lies my daydreamer mindset. I don't believe in money, it's made out of thin air and holds no value. The value of money comes from debt, and when more money enters the market, it's value takes from the money already in the market. Just a big cycle of debt.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.