Future and tech

[Davve95 273]

What are the trend comming from when everything is supposed to be automated? 

I mean some stuff is great, but some stuff is just too silly... I mean further on it can't be great that we don't gonna do much our selfs, like not even be able to drive by our selfs

 

When machines taking over our jobs (when more jobs is needed) What have they thought people should do if they don't have jobs? 

(I mostly think further on). 

Also have been thinking about what when everything will need eletricity even more... 

It is not so great for the enviroment either when more eletric stuff going to recycle? 

 

Just some thoughts (I don't know much about this subject) . Please keep the comments on a nice level. 

 

Edited June 26 by Davve95

[uNi 11,258]

There's nothing wrong with machines taking over our jobs.

[SilverRST 3,794]

If more machines are taking over people their jobs, then they won't be able to spend money. I'm wondering if the ceo's/founders have thought of that and how the companies will earn any money.

[uNi 11,258]

New jobs roles are created, people work on those. 

[sivispacem 19,485]

5 hours ago, uNi said:

New jobs roles are created, people work on those. 

This. For all the vaunted assertions that "machines will lead to mass unskilled and semi-skilled unemployment", developed economies have shown an overall decline in unemployment as automation becomes more prevalent.

[Finite 2,356]

In the short-term. 

 

Longer-term over the course of the next two decades this will become a very real, very obvious problem, computers and machines are likely to have general equal if not greater parity with human minds, right now the majority of automation is not interlinked in the way it will be either, gradually as we transition into societies ever increasingly reliant on the IoT the need for human workers in many fields will lessen considerably and in some cases entirely.

[Davve95 273]

That's quite scary. I don't see the point with having robots identical to humans. Well at somethings it might suite. Such as them helping police and soldiers.

 

Sorry for bumping. But I completely forgot about this topic. 

 

Btw: Are there any ideas of new job roles? Currently I could just come up with special stuff for the robots. 

 

Edited August 29 by Davve95

[sivispacem 19,485]

On 8/7/2019 at 6:41 PM, Finite said:

In the short-term. 

...

Longer-term over the course of the next two decades this will become a very real, very obvious problem

On what are you basing this assertion? There's absolutely no historical evidence that this has been the case from industrialisation or automation, and I see no reason to legitimately believe that it will be the case in this instance. It certainly hasn't been thus far. 

[Finite 2,356]

In the past the technologies that I'm discussing existed in no real form, there is no real human predecessor to the IoT or to specialist AI, advanced robotics and so on, suffice it to say however that as automation becomes increasingly more efficient, AI will continue to develop at it's rapid pace and sooner or later there will be little left that is solely the purview of a human worker.

 

We have intrinsic limits that machines can and likely will surpass, replacing us historically was not an option, but a decade from now that will likely not remain the case.

[Static 5,616]

Youre always gonna need maintenance technicians to keep said robotics operating simply because machines can and will breakdown.

Edited August 31 by Static

[Finite 2,356]

There is no reason at all why a machine couldn't self-repair and maintain.

 

More pertitant is the question of total losses, if we have two maintenance workers for every 20 people losing work to the machines they maintain that is still a net loss.

[sivispacem 19,485]

13 hours ago, Finite said:

IoT

IoT is just the fad buzzword for "connecting things to networks". It doesn't fundamentally impact jobs at all.

 

13 hours ago, Finite said:

specialist AI

Thus-far AI and ML has been a significant job creator whilst displacing literally zero. The roles its typically being implemented in are not generally human driven anyway, and it's really not been especially impactful where it had been implemented. Think small incremental improvements rather than revolutionary.

 

13 hours ago, Finite said:

advanced robotics 

Have already existed longer than you or I have been alive and exemplify exactly why these exercises in armchair futurology can be so misguided. Even in industries such as automotive, where over 40% of extant robots are located, they have a job depressing impact; in fact the inverse is often true.

 

All the speculation around the eventual job impact of these new technologies when they reach maturity is, frankly, guesswork. The academic models designed to explore it are so vastly varied in their outcomes the only reasonable conclusion is that we don't know what, if any, impact there will be. 

[DEALUX 2,400]

We're only like 10-20 years away from fully autonomous cars. I feel like that alone is going to destroy millions of human jobs. I also don't see anything analogous in history, I mean not really, to what eventually might happen with AI. It could literally blow up overnight once it is intelligent enough to learn on its own and do it quickly and it's hard to say if and when it will benefit all of humanity.

13 hours ago, Static said:

Youre always gonna need maintenance technicians to keep said robotics operating simply because machines can and will breakdown.

Humans "fix" themselves. A machine more intelligent than humans would be able to fix itself, wouldn't you think?

Edited August 31 by DEALUX

[Static 5,616]

10 hours ago, DEALUX said:

Humans "fix" themselves. A machine more intelligent than humans would be able to fix itself, wouldn't you think?

Not until Nanotech becomes widely available/practical. Technically your average desktop is already "smarter" than the user, but that doesnt stop the pc from getting borked via updates of any kind. So until theres literally a 0% error margin for any kinda of tech, you'll still need some kind of human oversight.

Edited September 1 by Static

[HaRdSTyLe_83 5,165]

On 8/30/2019 at 7:08 PM, Finite said:

We have intrinsic limits that machines can and likely will surpass, replacing us historically was not an option, but a decade from now that will likely not remain the case.

 

Even if in 20y all human jobs have been replaced, people will still need money to buy whatever product the machines that replaced you are producing, every advance in technology have been to improve our quality of living and we have adapted to newer and less demanding jobs.

 

 

On 8/31/2019 at 6:10 PM, DEALUX said:

We're only like 10-20 years away from fully autonomous cars. I feel like that alone is going to destroy millions of human jobs. I also don't see anything analogous in history, I mean not really, to what eventually might happen with AI. It could literally blow up overnight

 

im sure if what you mean actually happened, newer jobs coming from the advance in thay technology would also be created. We cant even imagine the jobs we will have in the future, the same way my grandfather never imagined how a streamer makes a living now. How many AI jobs have been created in the past decade?

 

 

[Finite 2,356]

That is only ever relevant as far as human limits lie, when they surpass humans in many fields, there will be no job created that cannot also be done by a machine.

[HaRdSTyLe_83 5,165]

2 hours ago, Finite said:

That is only ever relevant as far as human limits lie, when they surpass humans in many fields, there will be no job created that cannot also be done by a machine.

 

so lets say all jobs are done by machines, how does that work?  who buys the product/service if no one have a job and money ?

[sivispacem 19,485]

On 8/31/2019 at 6:10 PM, DEALUX said:

We're only like 10-20 years away from fully autonomous cars.

From a technology perspective maybe, but we've been "10 or 20 years" from fusion power and androids since the 1950s because technological development and adoption is relatively unpredictable.

 

On 8/31/2019 at 6:10 PM, DEALUX said:

It could literally blow up overnight once it is intelligent enough to learn on its own 

I think your interpretation of what's constitutes artificial intelligence is more grounded in science fiction than science fact.

[DEALUX 2,400]

I'm not sure I understand you position. Do you not think a super intelligent AGI is possible? I don't think it's that ridiculous to suggest that one might be created in our lifetime, I mean especially when you look at the explosion of technology in the past 100 years (actually even less than that).

[sivispacem 19,485]

Are there specific AI applications where it can potentially supercede existing approaches? Yes.

 

Is it possible to develop a superintelligent general purpose AI? Perhaps, but it's a long long way off given we can't even write a convincing chatbot.

 

If these hypothetical AIs ever existed, would they have the impact on jobs you suggest the would? Who knows?

 

 

 

My "position" is that speculating about the potential job impact of hypothetical constructs we're still taking the earliest baby steps in developing the most basic underlying technologies for seems a bit premature. I also don't really think you "get" how labour intensive the process for developing even the most rudimentary approximations of what is in public parlance called "AI" is, or how restrictive and human driven existing machine learning approaches are. 

 

Historic trajectory is no real indicator of future trajectory. We went from the most rudimentary flying machines made from wood and canvas to landing people on other astronomical bodies in a period of approximately fifty years...then have subsequently made exactly zero further progress in manned spaceflight since. The speed record for the fastest air breathing aircraft was set in 1976. The outright atmospheric speed record was set in 1967.

 

AI subject matter experts are wrangling over feasibility of most of what you've outlined full stop, let alone in the short term. What makes you more certain than them if not- and I mean no insult by this- a slightly misguided understanding of the subject?

[DEALUX 2,400]

Actually there are AI "experts" that are worried about AGI. Not sure what the consensus is. I assume most of them don't find it an immediate threat.

[sivispacem 19,485]

13 minutes ago, DEALUX said:

Actually there are AI "experts" that are worried about AGI. 

I never said, inferred or suggested there weren't.

[Night Machine 382]

On 6/28/2019 at 7:05 PM, uNi said:

New jobs roles are created, people work on those. 

Kind of like how Walmart is moving to all self checkouts. Now they literally just stand there watching you do their job for them. We basically became the automated robots for them and their new job is to watch us and assist if needed. At least we could get a discount for ringing and bagging all this sh*t ourselves in a small inconvenient space. lol. 

Edited September 7 by Night Machine

[Mister Pink 9,663]

On 6/29/2019 at 2:05 AM, uNi said:

New jobs roles are created, people work on those. 

Exactly.

 

It's kind of why I wasn't a fan of Andrew Yang when he went on his tirade about AI/Autonomous driving potentially taking over truck driving jobs. He went on JRE and that was one of his main campaign objectives, to highlight the "impending" doom that is AI taking over unskilled jobs - despite this in the first 3 minutes of this video, he actually makes a great argument for the trucking industry to be automated.  

[Baserape 1,595]

Like voyager 1&2, robots will out live us and tell our story of success and failure. Hopefully they will allow us to live a quality life.   Maybe a eternal life in the far future. 

[Mister Pink 9,663]

4 hours ago, Baserape said:

Like voyager 1&2, robots will out live us and tell our story of success and failure. Hopefully they will allow us to live a quality life.   Maybe a eternal life in the far future. 

Yeah and they'll have vicarious nostalgia of the good old days, when a human would top up your coffee in a diner with a genuine organic smile. 

[Finite 2,356]

The key issue with automated transport of any kind is that when it reaches a sufficient level, morally you can't ignore the argument that suggests that all humans should no longer be permitted to drive any form of vehicle outside of say, recreationally maintained areas similar to race tracks.