Technological unemployment is (almost) here

[cbeast]

3D printers will be key. When 3D printers are affordable and everyone and their mother has one and they just can download open source free printeable materials ranging from simple figures to complex machines and assemble them, the industry will collapse since most of it will be do-it-yourself, there's no monterary system that can survive when technology goes this far. Deal with it.

Most people can't even assemble Ikea furniture.........

If things are engineered with universal designs and interchangeable parts, then things will be much easier to manufacture and maintain. Open source ecology is a project leading in this field.

[pawel7777]

3D printers will be key. When 3D printers are affordable and everyone and their mother has one and they just can download open source free printeable materials ranging from simple figures to complex machines and assemble them, the industry will collapse since most of it will be do-it-yourself, there's no monterary system that can survive when technology goes this far. Deal with it.

I see much more 'damage' coming from things like self-operating cars, or advancing in software that could replace (or massively reduce) customer service staff.

Technological unemployment is a real thing, simply there may be nowhere to go for the human labour. And if any new markets emerge, these too will likely be massively automated. The current technology is already advanced enough to replace quite significant % of man labour, it just hasn't been implemented yet.

Some sort of unconditional income is a way better idea than centrally planned economy.

Looks like Switzerland is heading that way:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/04/us-swiss-pay-idUSBRE9930O620131004

[Nicolas Dorier]

3D printers will be key. When 3D printers are affordable and everyone and their mother has one and they just can download open source free printeable materials ranging from simple figures to complex machines and assemble them, the industry will collapse since most of it will be do-it-yourself, there's no monterary system that can survive when technology goes this far. Deal with it.

I see much more 'damage' coming from things like self-operating cars, or advancing in software that could replace (or massively reduce) customer service staff.

Technological unemployment is a real thing, simply there may be nowhere to go for the human labour. And if any new markets emerge, these too will likely be massively automated. The current technology is already advanced enough to replace quite significant % of man labour, it just hasn't been implemented yet.

Some sort of unconditional income is a way better idea than centrally planned economy.

Looks like Switzerland is heading that way:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/04/us-swiss-pay-idUSBRE9930O620131004

This did not pass.

Imagine you have a business then you need labor. But your business is economically profitable only for labor at 1000 CHF.
How do you find your labor when unconditional income is coming ?
And labor worth 1000CHF will just stop working because not economically profitable.

Unconditional money is killing the definition of money.
Money is the device into which you store your effort.
If unconditional, then money will store the effort of someone else. And you'll grant your right to use someone's else effort for your own benefit. You are a looter.
If money store no effort, then it will stop being valuable, since you'll not be able to trade it anymore.

[pawel7777]

This did not pass.

Imagine you have a business then you need labor. But your business is economically profitable only for labor at 1000 CHF.
How do you find your labor when unconditional income is coming ?
And labor worth 1000CHF will just stop working because not economically profitable.

Unconditional money is killing the definition of money.
Money is the device into which you store your effort.
If unconditional, then money will store the effort of someone else. And you'll grant your right to use someone's else effort for your own benefit. You are a looter.
If money store no effort, then it will stop being valuable, since you'll not be able to trade it anymore.

I know they did not pass, just pointed that such idea is being seriously considered.

Imagine you have a business then you need labor. But your business is economically profitable only for labor at 1000 CHF.

What if minimum wage is 1001 CHF? Or better yet, what if unemployment benefit is 800 or 900? Who would work if he/she could do nothing for only 100 - 200 CHF less? It's more likely you'll find someone who would like to earn additional 1000 on top of his UI.

The UI idea can be just the extension of the benefit system, it could simplify things and, in effect reduce the administration costs.


But to be clear, I'm only in favour of UI idea in the context of technological problem becoming real issue. In the 'normal' conditions (when enough work is available) I'm 100% against it.

[giantdragon]

WIRED wrote about this topic:
http://www.wired.com/2014/08/when-robots-take-all-the-work-whatll-be-left-for-us-to-do/

[Nicolas Dorier]

Robot will remove surely all purely manual work. But I think there is time to pass before it happens.
A Robot does what we tell him, and there always be a need for people that can tell robot what to do, it is not the robot that make business but individuals.

The jobs will move from manual (I define as any repeating job) to intellectual, everybody will be store managers, business creators, programmers, designers of all kind or scientists.
Our mind can't be emulated by computer. Artificial intelligence can do very impressive tasks, but can't trade and decide by itself without the brain that know how to use it.

There is room for everyone.... but I admit that if the transition happens too quickly, there will be a war between manual and intellectual workers.
Intellectuals will need to work for subsidy to the manuals... The only end I see is intellectuals moving to the black market. But maybe I'm looking too far.

[TaunSew]

By the time robots remove most manual labour most white collar work would be gone too.

Sure It's easy to replace truck drivers as they drive on a static circuit of roads which never really changes.  

It's another to replace something like a plumber who has to navigate through obstacles (conduits, underneath buildings, ladders, et cetera) in an unmapped strange environment and then constantly problem solve.  You'll sooner see legal software replace most paralegals and lawyers.  Likewise software and rudimentary robots which can replace General Physicians and Nurses.

[giantdragon]

@Nicolas Dorier, you repeat a common fallacy ignoring the total number of jobs automated vs pittance of new intellectual positions created.

[marcus_of_augustus]

@Nicolas Dorier, you repeat a common fallacy ignoring the total number of jobs automated vs pittance of new intellectual positions created.

... maybe you should ask Oprah and Jerry Springer about why that is ... ?

[Nicolas Dorier]

@Nicolas Dorier, you repeat a common fallacy ignoring the total number of jobs automated vs pittance of new intellectual positions created.

... maybe you should ask Oprah and Jerry Springer about why that is ... ?

What I know is that the software industry has a painfull lack of human resources, and it will not stop.
I benefit from the shortage, my business as software development Trainer and consultant is going so well

Jobs are not static they just evolve to something different, because needs become different.
I don't believe a world where there is no need left to satisfy because everything is handled by robot. On the contrary, the more technology advances, more we need stuff, and the more we need stuff, the more business opportunity there is.

But I admit there can be a temporary mismatch between skills in the market and their needs.

[transient858]

@Nicolas Dorier, you repeat a common fallacy ignoring the total number of jobs automated vs pittance of new intellectual positions created.

... maybe you should ask Oprah and Jerry Springer about why that is ... ?

What I know is that the software industry has a painfull lack of human resources, and it will not stop.
I benefit from the shortage, my business as software development Trainer and consultant is going so well

Jobs are not static they just evolve to something different, because needs become different.
I don't believe a world where there is no need left to satisfy because everything is handled by robot. On the contrary, the more technology advances, more we need stuff, and the more we need stuff, the more business opportunity there is.

But I admit there can be a temporary mismatch between skills in the market and their needs.

While it may be true that certain jobs get boosted because of technology. Facts remain as technology get more advance, there will be more surplus of labor that has to go somewhere.

[Nicolas Dorier]

While it may be true that certain jobs get boosted because of technology. Facts remain as technology get more advance, there will be more surplus of labor that has to go somewhere.

Technology is a tree, everytimes technologies are appearing, several specialization and combination of them of it appears.
Computing gives rise to AI, cloud computing, web design, photoshop expert, mobile designer, SEO, community managers, developers, embedded device developers, system developers, designers.
The more we know the more there is to know, the more specialization appear and merge of knowledge between seemingly disparate fields. (Nano technology, bio technology)

Human knowledge is a fractal, the more you zoom, the more branches appears, and the perimeter increase to infinity.
And the farther we go the faster it zooms.

Sure we'll need at one point to be life long learners (as a developer, I am), and it will be hard to adapt for some people... And it is already hard, as a trainer, I can tell you that old developers have a hard time following what is going on.

This is an amazing time, truly amazing, but adaptation is becoming even more important than before.

[Leina]

While it may be true that certain jobs get boosted because of technology. Facts remain as technology get more advance, there will be more surplus of labor that has to go somewhere.

Technology is a tree, everytimes technologies are appearing, several specialization and combination of them of it appears.
Computing gives rise to AI, cloud computing, web design, photoshop expert, mobile designer, SEO, community managers, developers, embedded device developers, system developers, designers.
The more we know the more there is to know, the more specialization appear and merge of knowledge between seemingly disparate fields. (Nano technology, bio technology)

Human knowledge is a fractal, the more you zoom, the more branches appears, and the perimeter increase to infinity.
And the farther we go the faster it zooms.

Sure we'll need at one point to be life long learners (as a developer, I am), and it will be hard to adapt for some people... And it is already hard, as a trainer, I can tell you that old developers have a hard time following what is going on.

This is an amazing time, truly amazing, but adaptation is becoming even more important than before.

Specialization has its own downfall. The cost of replacement is high and training workers to do certain tasks are not easy.

[Nicolas Dorier]

The cost of replacement is high

In a a real free market, you will get capital if it is profitable to pay for the cost.

training workers to do certain tasks are not easy

I agree. Like I said, I am trainer and this is really really hard to teach to people that stopped learning anything several years ago. The learning part of their brain is completely off.
However, they stopped learning because they did not have the need. If it becomes mandatory, I guess workers will adapt to it and become self taught, and, I hope that my job as a trainer will become useless.
I think the current kids at in technological school are aware of that and will be better adapted.

I don't think it is a good policy to purposefully protect old jobs that does not require knowledge when the industry clearly need knowledge worker.
Such policy is preventing adaptation from happening.

[SMB-2525]

training workers to do certain tasks are not easy

I agree. Like I said, I am trainer and this is really really hard to teach to people that stopped learning anything several years ago. The learning part of their brain is completely off.
However, they stopped learning because they did not have the need. If it becomes mandatory, I guess workers will adapt to it and become self taught, and, I hope that my job as a trainer will become useless.
I think the current kids at in technological school are aware of that and will be better adapted.

I don't think it is a good policy to purposefully protect old jobs that does not require knowledge when the industry clearly need knowledge worker.
Such policy is preventing adaptation from happening.

As mentioned above, there are skills shortages in a number of information technology areas. Part of the problem companies face with company paid training is worker turnover can be high. It is difficult to bring in people in their 40s or 50s and pay then enough to support a family while they are learning their job. From the worker perspective, we expect them to retrain themselves while they are struggling to support a family.

In addition, older workers have difficulty learning new skills. It is very hard for me to get myself to learn an new programming language.

[Nicolas Dorier]

In addition, older workers have difficulty learning new skills. It is very hard for me to get myself to learn an new programming language.

It is not because you are old, it is because you stopped learning. (and certainly not because old people have less brain cells as the fallacy justify)
I noticed that independent developers never need training, except if they want a little boost. It does not depend on their age but need of their previous work.
An independent developer needs to train himself to get new contracts.
An employee, most of the time, just do the same thing over and over. (Software Vendor's employees does more various thing than software and computing services companies)
There is exception for sure, of independent that does always the same thing, and employee that changes, but this is rare.

From the worker perspective, we expect them to retrain themselves while they are struggling to support a family.

A worker can't retrain himself if he lost the ability to learn, this is why I am a trainer after all. The reason they are so bad at it is not age, but past's need.

When they tell me "I don't have time to train", this is bullshit.
What I am hearing is : "I don't want to work unpaid overtime to learn something that benefit my employer, when I can see my friends and family instead".
And they are right, this is all question of incentives.
But this is also why, independent consultants' rates are between 5 and 10 times higher. I really have to work 1 week per month.
So, I think, more and more will want to become independent. You can't be independent without learning by yourself, but incentives to learn are not the same, because you profit of your own skill.

This is why, I am very confident that people will start learning by themselves, when there is economic incentive to stay up to date, you stay up to date.
Learning is not limited by our brain but by our economic incentives to learn.

The transition will take time... and any unconditional income or minimal wage would stop it, making the shortage even bigger.

[marcus_of_augustus]

In addition, older workers have difficulty learning new skills. It is very hard for me to get myself to learn an new programming language.

It is not because you are old, it is because you stopped learning. (and certainly not because old people have less brain cells as the fallacy justify)
I noticed that independent developers never need training, except if they want a little boost. It does not depend on their age but need of their previous work.
An independent developer needs to train himself to get new contracts.
An employee, most of the time, just do the same thing over and over. (Software Vendor's employees does more various thing than software and computing services companies)
There is exception for sure, of independent that does always the same thing, and employee that changes, but this is rare.

From the worker perspective, we expect them to retrain themselves while they are struggling to support a family.

A worker can't retrain himself if he lost the ability to learn, this is why I am a trainer after all. The reason they are so bad at it is not age, but past's need.

When they tell me "I don't have time to train", this is bullshit.
What I am hearing is : "I don't want to work unpaid overtime to learn something that benefit my employer, when I can see my friends and family instead".
And they are right, this is all question of incentives.
But this is also why, independent consultants' rates are between 5 and 10 times higher. I really have to work 1 week per month.
So, I think, more and more will want to become independent. You can't be independent without learning by yourself, but incentives to learn are not the same, because you profit of your own skill.

This is why, I am very confident that people will start learning by themselves, when there is economic incentive to stay up to date, you stay up to date.
Learning is not limited by our brain but by our economic incentives to learn.

The transition will take time... and any unconditional income or minimal wage would stop it, making the shortage even bigger.

Listen to this guy ... he totally knows what he is talking about ... people stop learning because they have chosen to at some point in their past.

Old guys, with experience in many languages and fields, yet are still able to self-train are like gold and worth 5-10 times more than their younger counter-parts.

[Rassah]

Both of my parents have Masters in microbiology. Both reached a pay ceiling in that field, and spent their evenings with a private tutor learning software development, while in their early 50s, still having a family to take care of (I was out, but I think my brother was still in highschool), and not really knowing much about computers. Only because they knew programming is in high demand and is where the money is at. Both now earn more than twice what they used to. So yes, it's not age...

Someone earlier in this thread said that "The current technology is already advanced enough to replace quite significant % of man labour, it just hasn't been implemented yet." While the poster simply stated that as an ominous looming threat, and trailed off, you guys really need to examine why it hasn't happened yet.

[bigtimespaghetti]

Both of my parents have Masters in microbiology. Both reached a pay ceiling in that field, and spent their evenings with a private tutor learning software development, while in their early 50s, still having a family to take care of (I was out, but I think my brother was still in highschool), and not really knowing much about computers. Only because they knew programming is in high demand and is where the money is at. Both now earn more than twice what they used to. So yes, it's not age...

Someone earlier in this thread said that "The current technology is already advanced enough to replace quite significant % of man labour, it just hasn't been implemented yet." While the poster simply stated that as an ominous looming threat, and trailed off, you guys really need to examine why it hasn't happened yet.

To chime in on the programming aspect- I'm only 30 and experiencing similar pulls towards coding where my field is predominantly creative (I'm a games animator) there are more and more demands for multi-skilled individuals with preference towards programming/scripting. I'm lucky that I have somewhat of a proclivity towards technical skills, but a lot of my colleagues struggle to find pure animation work.

Are you suggesting that certain automation hasn't been implemented due to the significant disruption that would likely occur? It's plausible I suppose, but I think it's creeping in, slowly. Banks having automated deposit machines now, same at train stations in the UK...

[noel57]

Automation will just make things cheaper, so people will need less money and just need to work less.
If the automation doesn't make things cheaper then how will all these people without jobs be able to afford the products created by this automation? How will this automation survive economically?

These problems are always resolved automatically and naturally by market forces.

aside:
Unemployment is an artificially created situation used by governments to keep the employment market competitive and wages low.
It's easy to solve n% unemployment if you want to - just make everyone work n% less and thus create n% more work.

I do not think i would have put in another way, well said.