Robotics Is Coming Faster Than You Think

[innocentbee]

Robots Replacing People. China’s move to robotics should raise alarm bells for any executives still doubting the speed of the transition now underway. With a workforce of around 900 million people and the still fresh memory of an economic miracle built on low-cost labor, China might seem an unlikely place for robotics to explode.

In fact, companies like Foxconn have spent several years developing and installing thousands of industrial robots. In 2015, China bought more industrial robots than all of Europe. Even faster growth was seen in Mexico, which nearly doubled units bought compared to 2014.

The robotics revolution was long thought to be mainly about Europe, Japan and the US. No longer. The whole world is on board and things are speeding up.

[1714945781]

1714945781

[1714945781]

1714945781

[1714945781]

1714945781

[1714945781]

1714945781

[1714945781]

1714945781

[1714945781]

1714945781

[apollofire]

There is  doubt Robotics is the future but we cant let it overcome human labor. That would be disastrous

[zenitzz]

Robots Replacing People. China’s move to robotics should raise alarm bells for any executives still doubting the speed of the transition now underway. With a workforce of around 900 million people and the still fresh memory of an economic miracle built on low-cost labor, China might seem an unlikely place for robotics to explode.

In fact, companies like Foxconn have spent several years developing and installing thousands of industrial robots. In 2015, China bought more industrial robots than all of Europe. Even faster growth was seen in Mexico, which nearly doubled units bought compared to 2014.

The robotics revolution was long thought to be mainly about Europe, Japan and the US. No longer. The whole world is on board and things are speeding up.

The robot definitely be faster in thinking as they have in the program and the robot never can improvise in some way other than that they also do not have the reflexes. robot will never replace human.

[criptix]

Robots Replacing People. China’s move to robotics should raise alarm bells for any executives still doubting the speed of the transition now underway. With a workforce of around 900 million people and the still fresh memory of an economic miracle built on low-cost labor, China might seem an unlikely place for robotics to explode.

In fact, companies like Foxconn have spent several years developing and installing thousands of industrial robots. In 2015, China bought more industrial robots than all of Europe. Even faster growth was seen in Mexico, which nearly doubled units bought compared to 2014.

The robotics revolution was long thought to be mainly about Europe, Japan and the US. No longer. The whole world is on board and things are speeding up.

The robot definitely be faster in thinking as they have in the program and the robot never can improvise in some way other than that they also do not have the reflexes. robot will never replace human.

Looking at your posts it shouldnt be hard for a robot to be smarter.

[signup01]

Robots Replacing People. China’s move to robotics should raise alarm bells for any executives still doubting the speed of the transition now underway. With a workforce of around 900 million people and the still fresh memory of an economic miracle built on low-cost labor, China might seem an unlikely place for robotics to explode.

In fact, companies like Foxconn have spent several years developing and installing thousands of industrial robots. In 2015, China bought more industrial robots than all of Europe. Even faster growth was seen in Mexico, which nearly doubled units bought compared to 2014.

The robotics revolution was long thought to be mainly about Europe, Japan and the US. No longer. The whole world is on board and things are speeding up.

The robot definitely be faster in thinking as they have in the program and the robot never can improvise in some way other than that they also do not have the reflexes. robot will never replace human.

Looking at your posts it shouldnt be hard for a robot to be smarter.

Yes, maybe it can. Robots are made by human. If a group of smart people make a robot, it can be a perfect robot with high speed thinking process. But, robot are made by human, so human also can destroy a robot. It based on human mindset, want them controlled by robot? Or want them control the robot? Like now, many people are controlled by their gadget even it made by human. But not much people too who use gadget just to easier their life without get effect from gadget (the effect is controlled by technology)

[Slow death]

You can create the many robot, but must create responsibly, all human inventions bring great misfortune. I wonder, where They find raw materials for construction of These robots? It has sensitive issues as:

Many countries are carriers of satellites and chemical weapons, and if the robot in future have access to military codes and destroy the world? has many large films and series que raises this question:

robots, are a benefit? or are a weapon that will exterminate us in the future?

Anyone who watched the series "the 100" movie "exterminator" and "i robot, of will smith" though the creators have exaggerated a bit. partly show us the danger of technology.

[Darcius9]

Robots has a great advantage. It would not jump on the buildings like those slaves.

[Das]

robots, are a benefit? or are a weapon that will exterminate us in the future?

No matter how smart a robot may be, it can't think all by its own. It can only do what it was programmed to do, so if we have dangerous robots in the future, it's because some scientists created them to kill, so we should point fingers at them, not the robots.

[kneim]

Robots Replacing People. ...

Already done. Human mankind behave like robots, and they are stupid like robots.

Human mankind should take care they are not becoming more stupid than robots. That would become their dying breath.

[Hirose UK]

Robots Replacing People. China’s move to robotics should raise alarm bells for any executives still doubting the speed of the transition now underway. With a workforce of around 900 million people and the still fresh memory of an economic miracle built on low-cost labor, China might seem an unlikely place for robotics to explode.

In fact, companies like Foxconn have spent several years developing and installing thousands of industrial robots. In 2015, China bought more industrial robots than all of Europe. Even faster growth was seen in Mexico, which nearly doubled units bought compared to 2014.

The robotics revolution was long thought to be mainly about Europe, Japan and the US. No longer. The whole world is on board and things are speeding up.

The robot definitely be faster in thinking as they have in the program and the robot never can improvise in some way other than that they also do not have the reflexes. robot will never replace human.

of course robots will never replace human. probably robots can think or do everything easily but human can do better. we just don't know ourselves, our potential.

so just recognize yourself first in order to know your capability of, and to know that your brain, your eyes, your hands, your legs, etc are better than robots'

[criptix]

Robots Replacing People. China’s move to robotics should raise alarm bells for any executives still doubting the speed of the transition now underway. With a workforce of around 900 million people and the still fresh memory of an economic miracle built on low-cost labor, China might seem an unlikely place for robotics to explode.

In fact, companies like Foxconn have spent several years developing and installing thousands of industrial robots. In 2015, China bought more industrial robots than all of Europe. Even faster growth was seen in Mexico, which nearly doubled units bought compared to 2014.

The robotics revolution was long thought to be mainly about Europe, Japan and the US. No longer. The whole world is on board and things are speeding up.

The robot definitely be faster in thinking as they have in the program and the robot never can improvise in some way other than that they also do not have the reflexes. robot will never replace human.

of course robots will never replace human. probably robots can think or do everything easily but human can do better. we just don't know ourselves, our potential.

so just recognize yourself first in order to know your capability of, and to know that your brain, your eyes, your hands, your legs, etc are better than robots'

I really doubt that our biological body can be better then artificial created robot bodies.
E.g. A body out of steel vs a body of flesh and blood.
Maybe you are talking about the moment but it will not stay like this in the future: I. E. Advances in soft robotics.

[kneim]

I really doubt that our biological body can be better then artificial created robot bodies.
E.g. A body out of steel vs a body of flesh and blood.
Maybe you are talking about the moment but it will not stay like this in the future: I. E. Advances in soft robotics.

Your answer proves that you are one of these human robots. Nature is perfect in relation to sustainability. Machinery is never permanent. A killing machine needs a body out of steel, but after it has fulfilled his mission, it stops moving and begins to erode.

Human mankind can love, robots can not. If humans forget to love, they will starve to death.

Robots behave reasonable, humans do not. As soon as humans start believing to be reasonable, war is just around the corner.

[criptix]

I really doubt that our biological body can be better then artificial created robot bodies.
E.g. A body out of steel vs a body of flesh and blood.
Maybe you are talking about the moment but it will not stay like this in the future: I. E. Advances in soft robotics.

Your answer proves that you are one of these human robots. Nature is perfect in relation to sustainability. Machinery is never permanent. A killing machine needs a body out of steel, but after it has fulfilled his mission, it stops moving and begins to erode.

Human mankind can love, robots can not. If humans forget to love, they will starve to death.

Robots behave reasonable, humans do not. As soon as humans start believing to be reasonable, war is just around the corner.

1. Machine erodes

The human is a biological machine.
Everything except emotions and self consciousness can be applied to a machine. (Stand of today)

2. Emotions & self consciousness

Again, the human is just an very advanced biological machine (depending on scientists in development for 10 millions of years).
If we are advanced enough we will be able to create sentient machines.

3. Nature is in perfect sustainability

What about global killers?
Nature has a lot of random noises which is very logical if you believe in evolution.

You should read up more kneim to get up to date about science and philosophy.

[kneim]

1. Machine erodes

The human is a biological machine.
Everything except emotions and self consciousness can be applied to a machine. (Stand of today)

A machine is a robot made by human beings. This machine cannot survive by itself. It has no true emotions. It is missing curiosity and doubt, and is build only for a mission. If this mission is completed, it erodes.

2. Emotions & self consciousness

Again, the human is just an very advanced biological machine (depending on scientists in development for 10 millions of years).
If we are advanced enough we will be able to create sentient machines.

It's a matter how we define words. Human mankinds are NOT machines. Are you a machine? If yes, are you an advanced one? What is your advantage?

You want to make love with a sentient machine? What company should I invest into to offer this service to you?

3. Nature is in perfect sustainability

What about global killers?
Nature has a lot of random noises which is very logical if you believe in evolution.

You should read up more kneim to get up to date about science and philosophy.

Albert Einstein told us, "all is relative", and he is absolutely true. At this time the only global killer is human mankind. It will be stopped by natural rules.

[European Central Bank]

There is  doubt Robotics is the future but we cant let it overcome human labor. That would be disastrous

the people who own the robots don't care about throwing away human labor. it would be interesting to see what happens when there's no one left who can afford the products they're churning out.

tech moves way faster than society can. we're in for an interesting near future.

[countryfree]

There is  doubt Robotics is the future but we cant let it overcome human labor. That would be disastrous

the people who own the robots don't care about throwing away human labor. it would be interesting to see what happens when there's no one left who can afford the products they're churning out.

tech moves way faster than society can. we're in for an interesting near future.

I'm not sure interesting is the right word.
If robots can make pizzas and drones can deliver them, that won't leave much opportunity for the unskilled. I guess beautiful women will always have opportunities, but it's gonna be tough for plenty others.

[Gronthaing]

^ may not be only unskilled work. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

https://www.rt.com/viral/357191-self-driving-taxi-singapore/ only 6 taxis for now. It is still limited on who can ride. But plans to expand to a full fleet in 2018.

There is  doubt Robotics is the future but we cant let it overcome human labor. That would be disastrous

the people who own the robots don't care about throwing away human labor. it would be interesting to see what happens when there's no one left who can afford the products they're churning out.

tech moves way faster than society can. we're in for an interesting near future.

Can't afford the products or the machines to make them? Answer i got to that from some here was something like: go into the woods or wherever and start your own society. Crazy.

[kneim]

Can't afford the products or the machines to make them? Answer i got to that from some here was something like: go into the woods or wherever and start your own society. Crazy.

Although meant deprecatingly, the answer is right. Machines are specialized in making junk food. Other machines are specialized in making bitter pills, for trying to regain health. Defense is very simple: Buy Coca-Cola shares for offering services to "reasonable" people, but do not consume it or apply for it.

[Gronthaing]

Can't afford the products or the machines to make them? Answer i got to that from some here was something like: go into the woods or wherever and start your own society. Crazy.

Although meant deprecatingly, the answer is right. Machines are specialized in making junk food. Other machines are specialized in making bitter pills, for trying to regain health. Defense is very simple: Buy Coca-Cola shares for offering services to "reasonable" people, but do not consume it or apply for it.

You realize most people can't make a living by investing money like that right? Many are already living pay check to pay check. It isn't 1 or 2 shares that are going to sustain them or pay their bills. Then not all machines are used to produce useless things you can do without. Not if you want to participate in society. Cars are a must in some places. Others can't work without access to a computer and internet. Etc. And that tendency isn't going to reverse.

[kneim]

Can't afford the products or the machines to make them? Answer i got to that from some here was something like: go into the woods or wherever and start your own society. Crazy.

Although meant deprecatingly, the answer is right. Machines are specialized in making junk food. Other machines are specialized in making bitter pills, for trying to regain health. Defense is very simple: Buy Coca-Cola shares for offering services to "reasonable" people, but do not consume it or apply for it.

You realize most people can't make a living by investing money like that right? Many are already living pay check to pay check. It isn't 1 or 2 shares that are going to sustain them or pay their bills. Then not all machines are used to produce useless things you can do without. Not if you want to participate in society. Cars are a must in some places. Others can't work without access to a computer and internet. Etc. And that tendency isn't going to reverse.

My proposal is a double attack. But it works with one side alone, stop consuming waste (makes the enterprise collaps if everybody does it, sustains health, and creates some holdings, one can begin to buy shares or silver ounces with it), or maximise dividends until nobody can affort this trash (makes the enterprise collaps if every shareholder does it).

On the other side in my world there is no such thing as private property (nobody can take my holdings as long as I not misuse them). These my holdings are for people that behave natural, and I have much trouble in finding them any more. The "Homo Oeconomicus" in our brain makes us a daft monster.

[kneim]

The "go into the woods" can be regarded as a suggestion, to create human communities, for keeping the value of work in between the participants, and not to loose live energy to a greedy state or "capitalists".

(the state is not necassarily greedy, taxes could be distributed fairly, but in my opinion he is a mirror of the citizenship, so he represents the population in it's average behaviour)

[Gronthaing]

Can't afford the products or the machines to make them? Answer i got to that from some here was something like: go into the woods or wherever and start your own society. Crazy.

Although meant deprecatingly, the answer is right. Machines are specialized in making junk food. Other machines are specialized in making bitter pills, for trying to regain health. Defense is very simple: Buy Coca-Cola shares for offering services to "reasonable" people, but do not consume it or apply for it.

You realize most people can't make a living by investing money like that right? Many are already living pay check to pay check. It isn't 1 or 2 shares that are going to sustain them or pay their bills. Then not all machines are used to produce useless things you can do without. Not if you want to participate in society. Cars are a must in some places. Others can't work without access to a computer and internet. Etc. And that tendency isn't going to reverse.

My proposal is a double attack. But it works with one side alone, stop consuming waste (makes the enterprise collaps if everybody does it, sustains health, and creates some holdings, one can begin to buy shares or silver ounces with it), or maximise dividends until nobody can affort this trash (makes the enterprise collaps if every shareholder does it).

This would need too many people to stop consuming for it to work. And would need them to be able to overcome all the publicity and social pressure they are under. On the other hand it is true that if automation starts putting great numbers of people out of work that will happen by itself. But it won't be pretty.

On the other side in my world there is no such thing as private property (nobody can take my holdings as long as I not misuse them). These my holdings are for people that behave natural, and I have much trouble in finding them any more. The "Homo Oeconomicus" in our brain makes us a daft monster.

Not that I disagree with something like that. Maybe aiming for an access based economy as described in that zeitgeist movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w but maybe there are other steps that would be easier for most people to accept and could help with the transition when automation picks up. Something like promoting and buying what you need from cooperatives instead of normal businesses. Helping implement or strengthen codetermination laws: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-determination should help make current businesses more democratic and prevent many of the excesses. And maybe eventually implement some type of basic income for everyone.

The "go into the woods" can be regarded as a suggestion, to create human communities, for keeping the value of work in between the participants, and not to loose live energy to a greedy state or "capitalists".

(the state is not necassarily greedy, taxes could be distributed fairly, but in my opinion he is a mirror of the citizenship, so he represents the population in it's average behaviour)

Maybe something like that can be done for now in small enough numbers. But that life style probably won't support the amount of people that will become jobless in the not very distant future.

[kneim]

This would need too many people to stop consuming for it to work. And would need them to be able to overcome all the publicity and social pressure they are under. On the other hand it is true that if automation starts putting great numbers of people out of work that will happen by itself. But it won't be pretty.

Anybody is responsible for itself only (and perhaps it's children), and nobody else. If you should be the only one that behaves natural, you are not wrong, because all others do it wrong. Water is for live, not softdrinks. It is very simple, and everybody can understand this.

I need dividends also to compete rising insurance costs. A public health insurance can only work, if people do not destroy itself. This time is an escalation time, and price of health insurance will escalate too.

The pressure we see in the world is a pressure to become natural again. As soon as we are, no robot can replace us.

Basic income for everybody is one of my favorite recommendation for getting a better world. Not too high, for a very basic living only. It makes independant on inhuman pressure in ones jobs. Most high income nowadays is a conflict of interest only, and this conflict is escalating. The more ill the patient is, the more the medic is earning. The more inconsistent and complex the justice, the more the lawyer is earning. The more speculative the fondmanager is, the more he can earn. The more misfortune in this world, the more the aid organisation can gain.

In these times, every person, that does a really human job, makes itself needless, and is confronted with loss of one's livelihood.