Bitcoin Forum
July 17, 2018, 01:14:33 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All]
  Print  
Author Topic: Is 90% jobless rate possible when robots are used everywhere?  (Read 4208 times)
johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1000


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
July 31, 2011, 08:21:23 PM
 #1

If the technology has evolved to such a level that robots took over most of the human jobs in 2050, will most of the human become jobless and only those working for robot companies have a job?

Obviously this day is approaching, the using of computer and software has eliminated countless jobs today, and will continue to do so in a much faster rate, due to the whole IT industry is getting more mature and efficient

I think this has much to do with most of the problems we are having today: High jobless rate, lower social wellfare, government debt, etc...

We definitely need a new finance/economy model which can cope with a computer/automation based society

To be more abstract: How can we deal with the fast increase in productivity but slow and uneven increase in income/demand?

Anyone interested, welcome to give your thoughts! Smiley

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Andris
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 31, 2011, 08:43:45 PM
 #2

This was actually the logic behind Marx's quote "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need." Eventually, technology allows so much production for so little effort that people who take up maintaining civilization as a hobby are enough.
TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 31, 2011, 08:54:26 PM
 #3

The solution to this problem is already in motion and has been for a long time.  Those at the top are slowly eliminating the useless Eaters(that means us).  Food, Water, Air, Vaccines, Wars.  We are being contaminated down to our very genetic structure to make sure we can no longer breed or rise up against oppression.

This as a side effect takes care of the problem you pose.  In the future there won't be a problem with needing to employ Humans.
Andris
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 31, 2011, 08:58:28 PM
 #4

I don't see any particular evidence that they're aiming for that goal, or even consider such disruption a possibility. You look at the assholes behind say, the recent market crash, and they aren't exactly innovators in any real sense. They just invented loopholes to exploit.
nafai
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 10



View Profile
July 31, 2011, 09:13:12 PM
 #5

Actually, automation allows people to pursue other endeavors they couldn't before.

For example, it is very common today for both adults in a family (man/woman) to work.  That wasn't possible 100 years ago, because somebody had to do the laundry (without a washing machine), cook the food (without a microwave), vacuum the house (without a roomba), etc etc.

Yes, the automobile put a lot of people out of work in the horse-and-buggy industry.  Was that a bad thing?

So is it a bad thing if automobiles are built by robots in fully automated factories?  Only if the people refuse to change with the times and find something more productive to do.

1HQiS9PLHPcoQMgN8ZdcGwhoMHWh2Hp37p
GideonGono
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 31, 2011, 09:36:59 PM
 #6

Jesus, this is so ridiculous. Huh

I bet you think immigrants 'steal' jobs as well?

           ▄▄███████████▄▄▄
        ███            ▀▀█████▄
      ██                   ▀█████▄
    ██                       ▀█████
   █          ██  ██           █████
  █           ██  ██            █████
 █        ▄▄███████████          █████
 █        █████████████           ████▌
█         █████                   █████
█         █████                   █▀ ▀█
█         ████████████              ▄ 
█         ████████████            ▄███▄
█         █████                   █████
 █        █████                   ████▌
 █        █████████████          █████
  █       ▀▀███████████         █████
   █▄         ██  ██          ▄████▀
    ▀█        ██  ██        ▄████▀
      ▀█▄                 ▄████▀
         ▀▀█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███▀▀▀
██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██
██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██
▄███▄
███████████████████████
██                   ██
██ ░███████████████░ ██
██                   ██
▀███ ░███████████████░ ███▀
▄  ▀█                   █▀  ▄
██▄    ███████████████    ▄██
████▄                   ▄████
██████▄               ▄██████
████████             ████████
██████▀  ▄██▄   ▄██▄  ▀██████
████▀  ▄██████▄██████▄  ▀████
██▀  ▄█████████████████▄  ▀██

WHITEPAPER
.▒██████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒██▄     ███████     ▄███▒
▒████     █████     █████▒
▒████ ▌    ███▌     █████▒
▒████ █     █▌ ▐    █████▒
▒████ ██      ▐█    █████▒
▒████ ███    ▐██    █████▒
▒███▀ ▀███   ███    █████▒
▒█▀     ▀██ ██▀      ▀███▒
▒████████████████████████▒
.▒██████████████████████▒
.▒██████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒█████████████▀    ▀█████▒
▒██░▀████████▌      ▀████▒
▒██░   ▀████▀        ▀███▒
▒██                 █████▒
▒███                █████▒
▒█████              █████▒
▒██████           ▄██████▒
▒█████▀         ▄████████▒
▒███▄▄      ▄▄███████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
 ▒██████████████████████▒
.▒██████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒████████████▀▀    ▓█████▒
▒███████▀▀     ▄▀  ▓█████▒
▒███▀▀       ▄▀    ██████▒
▒██░       ▄▀░░    ██████▒
▒████▄▄  ▄▀       ███████▒
▒████████▄░       ███████▒
▒█████████        ███████▒
▒██████████ ██▄▄ ████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
 ▒██████████████████████▒
Denicen
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 46
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 31, 2011, 10:09:30 PM
 #7

I was thinking about this a while ago too. It seems like there will still be poverty and large disparities in wealth, even if we were to have a fully automated economy that produces everything that we need with very little effort. There will still be an elite who have all of the high tech weaponry/make the laws and are able to have a monopoly on these fully automated industries.
TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
July 31, 2011, 10:30:19 PM
 #8

Mercury/Formaldehyde/genetic manipulations in vaccines are destroying us and are readily researchable online.

GMO foods(plants and animals) slowly sterilizing people and displacing natural plants and animals used to feed us.

Flouride and hundreds of other harmful chemicals and biologicals in the water.

Hazardous chemicals released into the Atmosphere daily, disrupting human health and ruining arable soil.

Warfare ofcourse speaks for itself.

Time to put the Big Boy Pants on and take a look around at what's being done to you.

I don't see any particular evidence that they're aiming for that goal, or even consider such disruption a possibility. You look at the assholes behind say, the recent market crash, and they aren't exactly innovators in any real sense. They just invented loopholes to exploit.
johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1000


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
July 31, 2011, 10:39:06 PM
 #9

Jesus, this is so ridiculous. Huh

I bet you think immigrants 'steal' jobs as well?

Not necessary immigrants, just some very low paid chinese workers will put all the US manufactoring job in danger

But my question is regarding the human being, not particular one race/nation, since this happens anywhere in the world

Anonymous
Guest

July 31, 2011, 10:46:03 PM
 #10

Jesus, this is so ridiculous. Huh

I bet you think immigrants 'steal' jobs as well?

Not necessary immigrants, just some market-value chinese workers will put overpaid Americans in danger.

FTFY
johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1000


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
July 31, 2011, 11:00:48 PM
 #11

Actually, automation allows people to pursue other endeavors they couldn't before.

For example, it is very common today for both adults in a family (man/woman) to work.  That wasn't possible 100 years ago, because somebody had to do the laundry (without a washing machine), cook the food (without a microwave), vacuum the house (without a roomba), etc etc.

Yes, the automobile put a lot of people out of work in the horse-and-buggy industry.  Was that a bad thing?

So is it a bad thing if automobiles are built by robots in fully automated factories?  Only if the people refuse to change with the times and find something more productive to do.

I like this positive views Smiley

Continuous structure change will constantly put people into new works, with more and more division of the work, more and more new products will be generated, this has been the case during the last several hundred years

But computer/software/robot is a little bit different, they are actually much higher efficient workers with very little paied(electricy), and it works in all the branches in the society, thus put almost everyone in danger, a very fast structure change that can cope with the exploding speed of AI adaptation do not exist today

By the way, new works normally comes from new demand, as more and more people's demand are filled, less and less left. Housing might be the biggest demand for many human, but when everyone already have his own house, what could be the next even bigger demand? An IPAD?

johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1000


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
July 31, 2011, 11:19:30 PM
 #12

Jesus, this is so ridiculous. Huh

I bet you think immigrants 'steal' jobs as well?

Not necessary immigrants, just some market-value chinese workers will put overpaid Americans in danger.

FTFY

US workers can be enough competetiv against chinese workers, but they have no way to be 1/100 competetiv against a robot, you have to rely on AMD cards to do the mining


myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532
Merit: 500


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
August 01, 2011, 12:26:34 AM
 #13

Now, Where have I heard this story before....

Wait, wait, don't tell me...

Oh! I remember now:


BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1000


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
August 01, 2011, 01:22:59 AM
 #14

I was thinking about this a while ago too. It seems like there will still be poverty and large disparities in wealth, even if we were to have a fully automated economy that produces everything that we need with very little effort. There will still be an elite who have all of the high tech weaponry/make the laws and are able to have a monopoly on these fully automated industries.

That means there is a systematic problem, we'd better find where the problem is

I think the purpose of making AI and robots is to free human from reputational labor, thus gain more time to enjoy life and create new things, so even if 90% of people do not have a job, they might have some more meaningful things to do

joulesbeef
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


moOo


View Profile
August 01, 2011, 01:42:02 AM
 #15

Quote
Now, Where have I heard this story before....

Wait, wait, don't tell me...

he isnt exactly wrong, one of the major drivers of disparity in the US is unskilled labor being replaced by machines or the chinese.

and right now, that is mainly all they are replacing.

Before too long though, and it is quicker than many of you think, they will start to replace skilled labor.. you can cry "change with the times" all you want, it just shows your ignorance on what is coming. We are no longer looking for a better machine than man, but a better mind. Have fun competing with that.

mooo for rent
nafai
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 10



View Profile
August 01, 2011, 01:51:32 AM
 #16

Quote
Before too long though, and it is quicker than many of you think, they will start to replace skilled labor.. you can cry "change with the times" all you want, it just shows your ignorance on what is coming. We are no longer looking for a better machine than man, but a better mind. Have fun competing with that.

You can call me ignorant all you want, but you're not learning from history. How many jobs today didn't exist AT ALL before the industrial revolution?  What is ignorant is not thinking the same thing will happen from the information revolution, the robotic revolution, the nanotech revolution, etc etc.

Maybe it's just because I'm a programmer, but I don't fear automation. I create automation every day.  Automation is not a bad thing, it's a very very good thing.  The only way automation would be bad is if there was a limited amount of "work" that needed to be done. But that is like thinking there is a limited amount of knowledge to discover, or a limited amount of wealth to earn. But that is false, it is not a zero-sum game.

Learn to reach for the stars, for pete's sake.

Or go back to churning your own butter so you at least have a job.

Your choice!

1HQiS9PLHPcoQMgN8ZdcGwhoMHWh2Hp37p
Littleshop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
August 01, 2011, 02:24:49 AM
 #17

Mercury/Formaldehyde/genetic manipulations in vaccines are destroying us and are readily researchable online.

Real research shows nothing like that.   There are people that refuse vaccines and they are generally less healthy.  There is a ton of serious research on this issue.  Read it. 

GMO foods(plants and animals) slowly sterilizing people and displacing natural plants and animals used to feed us.

If the goal of those things is to sterilize people, IT IS NOT WORKING.  There is no evidence anywhere higher rates of infertility, only people deciding to have less kids.  We are displacing natural plants and animals but more because we are reckless not because of GMO. 


Flouride and hundreds of other harmful chemicals and biologicals in the water.
Fluoride is well tested, and has been in use since 1945.  There majority of the world does NOT receive fluoridated water.  Are they doing better because of it?  Nope. 

You need more tinfoil dude.

Hazardous chemicals released into the Atmosphere daily, disrupting human health and ruining arable soil.

This is the only statement that you have made that is correct. 

bitplane
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 321
Merit: 250

Firstbits: 1gyzhw


View Profile WWW
August 01, 2011, 03:46:22 AM
 #18

Actually, automation allows people to pursue other endeavors they couldn't before.
Once we automate thinking there will be very few things left for humans to do. Aside from moving matter from one place to another, people are essentially employed for the sophisticated pattern recognition systems that human brains are good at. Once software is good enough and computers are fast enough, we're useless. In fact, I challenge anyone to think of a single job that a mixture of software and machinery is fundamentally incapable of. I can't think of any myself.

So in order to survive I think we'll need to completely redefine ideas of utility, the experience of simply living must be held higher than capitalist ideas of usefulness or profitability. Being neither wealthy or powerful, I think it's safe to assume that this change come be too late for the vast majority of us.

Whoever survives will have to reform ideas of progress too, idea-space is infinite; we could burn more matter and energy than the solar system has without even scraping the surface of what things and ideas are possible. Hell, we could waste all the energy in the universe just hashing bitcoin blocks!
TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 01, 2011, 03:52:17 AM
 #19

Mercury - How Mercury Causes Neurodegeneration (Brain Damage)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VImCpWzXJ_w

Formaldehyde - Material Safety Data Sheet(MSDS): See harmful effects

http://www.solutions.ca/WHMIS/docs/msds.pdf

Vaccines - Look up Recombinant Vaccine or DNA Vaccine

http://virology-online.com/general/typesofvaccines.htm

______

Infertility - Effects of GMO on Fertility

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1085060/Why-eating-GM-food-lower-fertility.html

and

http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&q=effects+of+gmo+on+fertility&oq=effects+of+gmo+on+fertility&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=18896l23482l0l23667l27l26l0l10l4l0l324l3157l0.8.7.1l16l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=80339b21fff5d4aa&biw=1902&bih=881

Infertility - Effects of Bisphenol A (BPA) on Fertility

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elaine-shannon/yale-scientists-discover_b_221518.html

Infertility - Cell Phones damage to Sperm DNA

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/07/11/cell-phones-cancer-and-infertility/

Infertility - Vaccine use to curb Fertility

http://www.oldthinkernews.com/?p=27

Nice Video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_-kvmaCRYk&feature=player_embedded

_______

Flouride: God there's so much information on the harmful effects of Flouride it's sick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3y8uwtxrHo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hW0_UMtsb4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NFOnQQMnx4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v_fzNyg95o&feature=related

Seriously dude pull your head out of your bum, you couldn't even be bothered to research anything of what I said before you blathered on with that garbage you wrote.

Mercury/Formaldehyde/genetic manipulations in vaccines are destroying us and are readily researchable online.

Real research shows nothing like that.   There are people that refuse vaccines and they are generally less healthy.  There is a ton of serious research on this issue.  Read it. 

GMO foods(plants and animals) slowly sterilizing people and displacing natural plants and animals used to feed us.

If the goal of those things is to sterilize people, IT IS NOT WORKING.  There is no evidence anywhere higher rates of infertility, only people deciding to have less kids.  We are displacing natural plants and animals but more because we are reckless not because of GMO. 


Flouride and hundreds of other harmful chemicals and biologicals in the water.
Fluoride is well tested, and has been in use since 1945.  There majority of the world does NOT receive fluoridated water.  Are they doing better because of it?  Nope. 

You need more tinfoil dude.

Hazardous chemicals released into the Atmosphere daily, disrupting human health and ruining arable soil.

This is the only statement that you have made that is correct. 
bitplane
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 321
Merit: 250

Firstbits: 1gyzhw


View Profile WWW
August 01, 2011, 04:11:16 AM
 #20

Seriously dude pull your head out of your bum, you couldn't even be bothered to research anything of what I said before you blathered on with that garbage you wrote.
When propping up an argument you should at least link to papers that have been cited by scientists who are respected in their fields, not YouTube videos and Daily Mail articles. If you buy into the whole mercury in vaccines causing autism thing then you're going against the consensus of the worldwide scientific community, thus we demand extraordinary evidence.

In the words of Dawkins: By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
 
Or in other words, stop believing every piece of shit you stumble across on the Internet.
Littleshop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
August 01, 2011, 04:53:04 AM
 #21

Mercury - How Mercury Causes Neurodegeneration (Brain Damage)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VImCpWzXJ_w

Formaldehyde - Material Safety Data Sheet(MSDS): See harmful effects

http://www.solutions.ca/WHMIS/docs/msds.pdf

Vaccines - Look up Recombinant Vaccine or DNA Vaccine

http://virology-online.com/general/typesofvaccines.htm

This is a link?  Youtube?  Give me some real science. 

The MSDS sheet for Formaldehyde is a start.  At least there is something that we do not disagree on.  It is a bad thing if you do not use it properly.  So stop huffing it. 



This here is the only bit that has science backing it up and it is 'food for thought'.  It does not prove GM food is bad for people but it does for mice.  No decreased fertility may be just what the human race needs but that is another conversation. 



Better.  Now you may have me.....   


Now you lost me again.  Sperms should not use cell phones and some more quack science.   Seriously, briefs can also lower fertility.  You might want to try boxers.
_______

Flouride: God there's so much information on the harmful effects of Flouride it's sick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3y8uwtxrHo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hW0_UMtsb4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NFOnQQMnx4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v_fzNyg95o&feature=related

Seriously dude pull your head out of your bum, you couldn't even be bothered to research anything of what I said before you blathered on with that garbage you wrote.
 
Seriously.  Youtube is not a source for science.  You put some real stuff not quack science.  Most of the world has non fluoridated water, we can see the effects with and without.  Show me some evidence that the people who are having it are being hurt by it. 

Also learning to spell fluoride right would be a start.  Maybe that is why you come up with such bad results!



The Script
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250



View Profile
August 01, 2011, 05:49:58 AM
 #22

Quote
Before too long though, and it is quicker than many of you think, they will start to replace skilled labor.. you can cry "change with the times" all you want, it just shows your ignorance on what is coming. We are no longer looking for a better machine than man, but a better mind. Have fun competing with that.

You can call me ignorant all you want, but you're not learning from history. How many jobs today didn't exist AT ALL before the industrial revolution?  What is ignorant is not thinking the same thing will happen from the information revolution, the robotic revolution, the nanotech revolution, etc etc.

Maybe it's just because I'm a programmer, but I don't fear automation. I create automation every day.  Automation is not a bad thing, it's a very very good thing.  The only way automation would be bad is if there was a limited amount of "work" that needed to be done. But that is like thinking there is a limited amount of knowledge to discover, or a limited amount of wealth to earn. But that is false, it is not a zero-sum game.

Learn to reach for the stars, for pete's sake.

Or go back to churning your own butter so you at least have a job.

Your choice!

Exactly.  Human desires are limitless.  Labor is the scarcest of resources.  There will be need of robot designers, maintainers, programmers, etc.  The only exception might be if we manage to create artificial intelligence; this would be the same affect as another intelligent species competing with us here on earth.  But if we do create the Singularity we will probably have bigger concerns than losing our jobs.  Wink 

Now where is my butter churn?
nafai
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 10



View Profile
August 01, 2011, 06:00:44 AM
 #23

Quote
In fact, I challenge anyone to think of a single job that a mixture of software and machinery is fundamentally incapable of. I can't think of any myself.

All forms of artistic/creative endeavor and innovation.  Do you think robots are going to expand the frontiers of science or give us new advances in technology on their own?  Do you think robots are going to invent new styles of games like Civilization, or say Minecraft?  What about the classical stuff like new works of art, music, et al.?  Think robots could be creative enough to come up with innovative music like say, Metallica? (admittedly, they could probably easily create some of the popular crap nowadays without breaking a sweat).  Think robots would make good poets?  (Again I guess it depends on your taste)

People pay money for all kinds of things.  Whatever people will pay money for, that is an opportunity to make money.

Not everyone is going to be into robotic prostitution.


1HQiS9PLHPcoQMgN8ZdcGwhoMHWh2Hp37p
TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 01, 2011, 07:07:08 AM
 #24

Lol I can only laugh at people who go on about scientific "consensus" when such groups have been been to tow the Government Propaganda line to get funding a la Global Warming.

Nice Talking point.  It's been beaten to death though.
bitplane
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 321
Merit: 250

Firstbits: 1gyzhw


View Profile WWW
August 01, 2011, 07:17:51 AM
 #25

Quote
In fact, I challenge anyone to think of a single job that a mixture of software and machinery is fundamentally incapable of. I can't think of any myself.

All forms of artistic/creative endeavor and innovation.  Do you think robots are going to expand the frontiers of science or give us new advances in technology on their own?  Do you think robots are going to invent new styles of games like Civilization, or say Minecraft?  What about the classical stuff like new works of art, music, et al.?  Think robots could be creative enough to come up with innovative music like say, Metallica? (admittedly, they could probably easily create some of the popular crap nowadays without breaking a sweat).  Think robots would make good poets?  (Again I guess it depends on your taste)

That's only assuming that some magical attribute called "creativity" exists, something that is impossible to describe as a system of symbols and therefore uncomputable. I personally believe that the steps of the creative process can be described using words, which are symbols, therefore it is computable. At the base level I'd say it's just a matter of exploring problem space by starting with a bunch of known ideas and applying old patterns to existing data, finding new problem solving patterns and adding them to your repertoire. I don't see why this couldn't be represented as an algorithm, an automated dumb process that does not require a conscious mind. Science and technology are relatively easy in this regard.

As for the arts, an AI that can write poetry, literature or compose classical music (Metalica is still pop music Wink) would require a model of a human mind. This is a bit harder than just innovating, but I don't see why it would be a fundamentally impossible task. They'd only need models that are accurate enough to fool humans, which has to be relatively easy if you're several thousand times more intelligent than any human who ever lived and know every cultural work ever created in immense detail.
bluefirecorp
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 882
Merit: 1000


View Profile
August 01, 2011, 08:11:49 AM
 #26

I honestly hope for a future where there is no need for money. Instead of having to manually do work for a job, there'd be a robotic counter-part to do it.


Just think -- being able to wake up and NOT have anything to do except what YOU want to do?

You like putting together computers, that's fine!
You like playing video games -- that's fine as well.
You like playing sports outside -- more power to you.
You like making food -- share it with others!

All these fun things wouldn't be limited to what you can buy/have access to because it'd be accessible by anyone and everyone.

Of course, this won't happen -- at least outside of my idealistic world set inside of my mind Tongue

~bluefirecorp

johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1000


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
August 01, 2011, 01:38:07 PM
 #27



Maybe it's just because I'm a programmer, but I don't fear automation. I create automation every day.  Automation is not a bad thing, it's a very very good thing.  The only way automation would be bad is if there was a limited amount of "work" that needed to be done. But that is like thinking there is a limited amount of knowledge to discover, or a limited amount of wealth to earn. But that is false, it is not a zero-sum game.


Ok then I know where is your positive attitude coming from, since you are belonging to those 10% who making robots.

But this does not solve the problem of the whole society.

Let's say: For each good programmer, you can replace 9 traditional worker, thus create 9 jobless people.  The problem is, this good programmer seldom have 10 times the income of those 9 people (maximum 4x), thus he never could spend as much as those 9 people added together.

You see? With the increased productivity, the total demand decreased, thus bring the whole GDP down, and drag the whole country into recession, this is unavoidable in today's economic system

To keep the total demand up, even these 9 people lost their job, they still have to spend as before

GideonGono
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 01, 2011, 02:57:48 PM
 #28



Maybe it's just because I'm a programmer, but I don't fear automation. I create automation every day.  Automation is not a bad thing, it's a very very good thing.  The only way automation would be bad is if there was a limited amount of "work" that needed to be done. But that is like thinking there is a limited amount of knowledge to discover, or a limited amount of wealth to earn. But that is false, it is not a zero-sum game.


Ok then I know where is your positive attitude coming from, since you are belonging to those 10% who making robots.

But this does not solve the problem of the whole society.

Let's say: For each good programmer, you can replace 9 traditional worker, thus create 9 jobless people.  The problem is, this good programmer seldom have 10 times the income of those 9 people (maximum 4x), thus he never could spend as much as those 9 people added together.

You see? With the increased productivity, the total demand decreased, thus bring the whole GDP down, and drag the whole country into recession, this is unavoidable in today's economic system

To keep the total demand up, even these 9 people lost their job, they still have to spend as before


That's your problem. Not technology.

           ▄▄███████████▄▄▄
        ███            ▀▀█████▄
      ██                   ▀█████▄
    ██                       ▀█████
   █          ██  ██           █████
  █           ██  ██            █████
 █        ▄▄███████████          █████
 █        █████████████           ████▌
█         █████                   █████
█         █████                   █▀ ▀█
█         ████████████              ▄ 
█         ████████████            ▄███▄
█         █████                   █████
 █        █████                   ████▌
 █        █████████████          █████
  █       ▀▀███████████         █████
   █▄         ██  ██          ▄████▀
    ▀█        ██  ██        ▄████▀
      ▀█▄                 ▄████▀
         ▀▀█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███▀▀▀
██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██
██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██
▄███▄
███████████████████████
██                   ██
██ ░███████████████░ ██
██                   ██
▀███ ░███████████████░ ███▀
▄  ▀█                   █▀  ▄
██▄    ███████████████    ▄██
████▄                   ▄████
██████▄               ▄██████
████████             ████████
██████▀  ▄██▄   ▄██▄  ▀██████
████▀  ▄██████▄██████▄  ▀████
██▀  ▄█████████████████▄  ▀██

WHITEPAPER
.▒██████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒██▄     ███████     ▄███▒
▒████     █████     █████▒
▒████ ▌    ███▌     █████▒
▒████ █     █▌ ▐    █████▒
▒████ ██      ▐█    █████▒
▒████ ███    ▐██    █████▒
▒███▀ ▀███   ███    █████▒
▒█▀     ▀██ ██▀      ▀███▒
▒████████████████████████▒
.▒██████████████████████▒
.▒██████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒█████████████▀    ▀█████▒
▒██░▀████████▌      ▀████▒
▒██░   ▀████▀        ▀███▒
▒██                 █████▒
▒███                █████▒
▒█████              █████▒
▒██████           ▄██████▒
▒█████▀         ▄████████▒
▒███▄▄      ▄▄███████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
 ▒██████████████████████▒
.▒██████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒████████████▀▀    ▓█████▒
▒███████▀▀     ▄▀  ▓█████▒
▒███▀▀       ▄▀    ██████▒
▒██░       ▄▀░░    ██████▒
▒████▄▄  ▄▀       ███████▒
▒████████▄░       ███████▒
▒█████████        ███████▒
▒██████████ ██▄▄ ████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
 ▒██████████████████████▒
johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1000


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
August 01, 2011, 03:31:29 PM
 #29

Today's ISM data is a good example, while industry continously improve the productivity, the whole manufacturing volume is shrinking due to less and less demand

GideonGono
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 01, 2011, 11:38:57 PM
 #30

Central Planning and the massive distortions it causes are to blame. Not technology. The high unemployment the US is facing is self inflicted. Some emerging economies are actually facing labor shortages.

           ▄▄███████████▄▄▄
        ███            ▀▀█████▄
      ██                   ▀█████▄
    ██                       ▀█████
   █          ██  ██           █████
  █           ██  ██            █████
 █        ▄▄███████████          █████
 █        █████████████           ████▌
█         █████                   █████
█         █████                   █▀ ▀█
█         ████████████              ▄ 
█         ████████████            ▄███▄
█         █████                   █████
 █        █████                   ████▌
 █        █████████████          █████
  █       ▀▀███████████         █████
   █▄         ██  ██          ▄████▀
    ▀█        ██  ██        ▄████▀
      ▀█▄                 ▄████▀
         ▀▀█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███▀▀▀
██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██
██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██  ██  ██
██
██  ██  ██
██
▄███▄
███████████████████████
██                   ██
██ ░███████████████░ ██
██                   ██
▀███ ░███████████████░ ███▀
▄  ▀█                   █▀  ▄
██▄    ███████████████    ▄██
████▄                   ▄████
██████▄               ▄██████
████████             ████████
██████▀  ▄██▄   ▄██▄  ▀██████
████▀  ▄██████▄██████▄  ▀████
██▀  ▄█████████████████▄  ▀██

WHITEPAPER
.▒██████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒██▄     ███████     ▄███▒
▒████     █████     █████▒
▒████ ▌    ███▌     █████▒
▒████ █     █▌ ▐    █████▒
▒████ ██      ▐█    █████▒
▒████ ███    ▐██    █████▒
▒███▀ ▀███   ███    █████▒
▒█▀     ▀██ ██▀      ▀███▒
▒████████████████████████▒
.▒██████████████████████▒
.▒██████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒█████████████▀    ▀█████▒
▒██░▀████████▌      ▀████▒
▒██░   ▀████▀        ▀███▒
▒██                 █████▒
▒███                █████▒
▒█████              █████▒
▒██████           ▄██████▒
▒█████▀         ▄████████▒
▒███▄▄      ▄▄███████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
 ▒██████████████████████▒
.▒██████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
▒████████████▀▀    ▓█████▒
▒███████▀▀     ▄▀  ▓█████▒
▒███▀▀       ▄▀    ██████▒
▒██░       ▄▀░░    ██████▒
▒████▄▄  ▄▀       ███████▒
▒████████▄░       ███████▒
▒█████████        ███████▒
▒██████████ ██▄▄ ████████▒
▒████████████████████████▒
 ▒██████████████████████▒
ansible adams
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 52
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 02, 2011, 12:49:54 AM
 #31

If robots are really used everywhere, then 90% unemployment isn't deprivation -- it's liberation.

If robots build everything, including themselves, and the only things still requiring human labor are things like art, science, and designing the next generation of robots, then that's the world set free from want. It's almost like having a replicator from Star Trek without the technobabble physics. If robots can do it all, every machine can ultimately be made starting with rocks, air, sea water, and sunlight. Things not directly manufactured (like food, natural fibers, and timber) can at least be tended and harvested by robots in place of farmers, ranchers, and fishers.

Machines are more thermodynamically efficient and less expensive than human labor and human muscles when it comes to performing simple mechanical work. If you need to pump 1000 cubic meters of water up from a mine, it's cheaper to get the energy from coal, uranium, diesel, or even photovoltaic panels for an electric pump than it is to feed a human enough rice to survive while pumping 1000 cubic meters manually. If human brains and hands find their replacements too, there's no reason to hope that displaced workers can find free market employment at a wage sufficient to prevent starvation. If a robot costs 40 cents per widget produced in electricity and replacement parts, and a human costs 60 cents per widget just to feed, then unless the robot capital costs are prohibitively high a rational employer will not choose humans over machines.

It's the phase between now and "machines make everything" that is worrying, because there may be a time when lots of jobs are eliminated but the machines still don't provide all necessities. So, for example, you might have the case of a construction worker who can't get work because construction is dominated by machines and he doesn't have the education for robot technician, but health care and agriculture haven't been fully automated so he still needs an income to get the insulin injections and food he needs to live. If the transition is slow enough many people will suffer pain but the system may survive intact over a long, slow deflationary era. If there are intermediate periods of (e.g.) prolonged 40% unemployment, expect sharp political discontinuities and shocks.

There's also a chance that the transition to a robotic economy is more or less orderly, but the outsize wealth accumulated in the mean time is used to further buttress the transition-period winners against the losers. Picture longer patent terms, broader copyright laws, and whole law enforcement divisions set up just to chase "intellectual property" violations. The only good news about that scenario is that it has historically proven futile. If everyone can copy a car for negligible marginal cost rather like they do with MP3s now, the auto industry will be facing a decline worse than the music publishers did over the past decade, no matter how many laws they buy. And if they try to enforce their ill-gotten laws with violence, the same robots that copy cars can copy weapons too.
Swishercutter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 100


View Profile
August 02, 2011, 01:51:57 AM
 #32

Jesus, this is so ridiculous. Huh

I bet you think immigrants 'steal' jobs as well?

Not necessary immigrants, just some very low paid chinese workers will put all the US manufactoring job in danger

But my question is regarding the human being, not particular one race/nation, since this happens anywhere in the world


How do you say "They took our jobs!!!" in Chinese?

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2011-07/30/c_131018764.htm

johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1000


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
August 02, 2011, 03:17:58 AM
 #33

If robots are really used everywhere, then 90% unemployment isn't deprivation -- it's liberation.
.
.
.

It's the phase between now and "machines make everything" that is worrying, because there may be a time when lots of jobs are eliminated but the machines still don't provide all necessities. So, for example, you might have the case of a construction worker who can't get work because construction is dominated by machines and he doesn't have the education for robot technician, but health care and agriculture haven't been fully automated so he still needs an income to get the insulin injections and food he needs to live. If the transition is slow enough many people will suffer pain but the system may survive intact over a long, slow deflationary era. If there are intermediate periods of (e.g.) prolonged 40% unemployment, expect sharp political discontinuities and shocks.

This is the key difficulty: Even machine can provide enough necessities to all of the human, they will not be distributed to each one that requires them, without a big change in today's economy/society model. And I strongly doubt that such kind of change could ever happen, since human's nature has not changed that much in the latest 1000 years

TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 02, 2011, 07:34:52 PM
 #34

The people that have all the money and most of the power on this planet are psychopaths.  They don't care about you or your family.  They have no loyalty to any nation.  They control the most advance technology on the planet(shit you don't even know exists).  They've fooled a chemically/psychologically dumbed down population into going along with whatever they want, or just not giving a shit cause American Idle is on.

When they've solidified their plans to the point you are not needed any more, you will be wiped out.

Why would they do this?

Why wouldn't they?

They are:

Egomaniacs
Psychopaths
Rich beyond imagining
Powerful(likely beyond your imagining)
Inhuman in their lack of compassion for other Humans(through centuries on inter-breeding and being raised with twisted values and beliefs)

Is it beyond your comprehension that these people have a plan for the world?

Is it beyond your comprehension that these people wouldn't blink an eye at your death?  At anyone's death but their own?

We see people who run big Pharmacological Companies or Oil Companies, making decisions that destroy lives of thousands or millions, and that is merely out of greed.  Can you imagine what a person like that listed above would do?

What they CAN do with what they have?

For your own protection don't even worry about what they will do or are doing.  Think about what they CAN do with that power, then look around you and watch.  Use a wide andgle lense if you will.  Take a step back, look at things on a global scale.  See who and what these people are connected to.

Make an effort.
The Script
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 250



View Profile
August 02, 2011, 08:39:53 PM
 #35

Jesus, this is so ridiculous. Huh

I bet you think immigrants 'steal' jobs as well?

Not necessary immigrants, just some very low paid chinese workers will put all the US manufactoring job in danger

But my question is regarding the human being, not particular one race/nation, since this happens anywhere in the world


How do you say "They took our jobs!!!" in Chinese?

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2011-07/30/c_131018764.htm



他们拿走我们的工作!

(Ta men na zou wo men de gong zuo.)

Not sure how to make it past tense, though.
evolve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700
Merit: 500


daytrader/superhero


View Profile
August 02, 2011, 09:02:44 PM
 #36

robots need R&D, programmers, and people to watch and maintain them. they also still have to be marketed, transported, and installed at the businesses/factories they operate in.

i think lower level jobs (unskilled labor) will see losses, but skilled jobs (engineers, programmers, repair techs, etc) will see an increase as robot labor becomes more ubiquitous.

i dont think humans can ever be pulled from the equation in any significant amount.
TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 02, 2011, 09:21:51 PM
 #37

Your logic is severely flawed.  I'm sorry but when robots can manufacture on a massive scale, then you don don't need tons of programmers or engineers as programs and schematics can be implemented worldwide remotely,  or repair techs which can be simply programmed.  When the overlords don't have a use for us, we will be tossed out.

robots need R&D, programmers, and people to watch and maintain them. they also still have to be marketed, transported, and installed at the businesses/factories they operate in.

i think lower level jobs (unskilled labor) will see losses, but skilled jobs (engineers, programmers, repair techs, etc) will see an increase as robot labor becomes more ubiquitous.

i dont think humans can ever be pulled from the equation in any significant amount.
evolve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700
Merit: 500


daytrader/superhero


View Profile
August 02, 2011, 09:58:06 PM
 #38

  When the overlords don't have a use for us, we will be tossed out.

no offense, but this statement makes me think that there is no way we can have a rational discussion.  i could be wrong, but it reeks of NWO/illuminati talk.
TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 02, 2011, 10:17:07 PM
 #39

Nice use of catch phrases and talking points to derail valid points.  Lol you are a credit......  to your Overlords lol.
evolve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700
Merit: 500


daytrader/superhero


View Profile
August 02, 2011, 10:19:19 PM
 #40

Nice use of catch phrases and talking points to derail valid points.  Lol you are a credit......  to your Overlords lol.

thank you, you just proved my point.
TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 02, 2011, 10:24:34 PM
 #41

More like you proved mine since your reply to my posts consists purely of regurgitated rhetoric used to self validate yourself while degrading others.  It fails miserably since people are generally not stupid enough to fall for it these days.

But hey, thanks for playing.
evolve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700
Merit: 500


daytrader/superhero


View Profile
August 02, 2011, 10:37:46 PM
 #42

ok, fine.. ill let you bait me into this.

your scenario of robots building, maintaining, and repairing themselves on a large scale without human intervention is, in my opinion, a pipe dream. have you put any thought into the complexity of the infrastructure would have to be for this to occur??? do you really think its possible to have that level of automation given current technology (and to do in all levels of production in every industry)? not to mention the more complex the system gets, the more that can go wrong..and while robots and computers are great at certain things, creative problem solving is not one of them (at least until AI becomes a viable technology). and theres still the issue of marketing, transporting, engineering, and programming new robots. (unless you think welder robot v1.0 is going to decide to build welder robot v2.0...) after all, the companies making the robots will need to make money...that means they need to create newer, better versions they can sell to continue to make money each year.

i stick by my opinion that we wont reach a level in which human intervention isnt required on a major scale.




thats the answer you would have gotten without the overlord bs, and im still not convinced you can rationally discuss this without bringing up some Illuminati crap.

TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 02, 2011, 10:41:03 PM
 #43

Sorry I stopped reading at this point since the OP was talking about 2050.  If you can't stay on the same page, put the book down.

"do you really think its possible to have that level of automation given current technology "

evolve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700
Merit: 500


daytrader/superhero


View Profile
August 02, 2011, 10:49:39 PM
 #44

you really think that level of automation would be possible in 40 years given that we arent even remotely close to it now?Huh? you dont think our current level of technology has any bearing on future technological gains?

not a very convincing argument  Undecided
TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 02, 2011, 10:52:12 PM
 #45

Wow, sounds like something they would have said in 1970 about today.

evolve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700
Merit: 500


daytrader/superhero


View Profile
August 02, 2011, 11:07:42 PM
 #46

Sorry to disappoint you, bit the technological gap between the 70's and now is exponentially smaller than the gap between now and the scenario you are suggesting.

You don't seem to have put any thought into what it would actually take to implement and maintain a system like you are talking about.
makomk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


View Profile
August 03, 2011, 12:12:26 AM
 #47

Exactly.  Human desires are limitless.  Labor is the scarcest of resources.  There will be need of robot designers, maintainers, programmers, etc.  The only exception might be if we manage to create artificial intelligence; this would be the same affect as another intelligent species competing with us here on earth.  But if we do create the Singularity we will probably have bigger concerns than losing our jobs.  Wink  
What happens when it isn't the scarcest resource anymore, though? The increases in efficiency over the past few centuries have followed a fairly consistent pattern: society has consistently replaced labour-intensive methods of doing things with less labour-intensive ones that require more resources and capital expenditure. Robot manufacturing is just one part of this.

If robots are really used everywhere, then 90% unemployment isn't deprivation -- it's liberation.

If robots build everything, including themselves, and the only things still requiring human labor are things like art, science, and designing the next generation of robots, then that's the world set free from want. It's almost like having a replicator from Star Trek without the technobabble physics. If robots can do it all, every machine can ultimately be made starting with rocks, air, sea water, and sunlight. Things not directly manufactured (like food, natural fibers, and timber) can at least be tended and harvested by robots in place of farmers, ranchers, and fishers.
It isn't, because you still need raw materials which are an awful lot more exotic than you think they are (such as neodynium for example) and very large quantities of other materials, and there's still scarcity of those, and the sources of the materials are owned by a tiny ultra-wealthy fraction of the world's population. Then there's the problem of capital expenses; a fabrication plant capable of building state-of-the-art chips costs billions of dollars to build and lots of money to keep running, and that's with the specialist equipment required being bought in from third parties that can spread their development costs across multiple fabs and companies. Even normal robot factories are hardly cheap.

Quad XC6SLX150 Board: 860 MHash/s or so.
SIGS ABOUT BUTTERFLY LABS ARE PAID ADS
johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1000


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
August 03, 2011, 12:18:01 AM
 #48

Either trying to prove it will not happen, or trying to make the plan when it happens, the latter I think is more positive:)

I never think "super powerful rich guys" have any intention to eliminate others that is in a weaker position. On the contrary, it is those weaker guys  make those stronger guys can show off and feel good:) But even for those powerful guys, they could still be very simple thinking from their own point of view, thus not seeing the whole picture


TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 03, 2011, 03:04:08 AM
 #49

Your statement lacks validity, substance, and anything approaching infomration leading anyone to believe it.  Technology apparantly has left you behind.  Perhaps in the 70's?

Again, thanks for playing.

Sorry to disappoint you, bit the technological gap between the 70's and now is exponentially smaller than the gap between now and the scenario you are suggesting.

You don't seem to have put any thought into what it would actually take to implement and maintain a system like you are talking about.

ansible adams
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 52
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 03, 2011, 03:09:19 AM
 #50

If robots are really used everywhere, then 90% unemployment isn't deprivation -- it's liberation.

If robots build everything, including themselves, and the only things still requiring human labor are things like art, science, and designing the next generation of robots, then that's the world set free from want. It's almost like having a replicator from Star Trek without the technobabble physics. If robots can do it all, every machine can ultimately be made starting with rocks, air, sea water, and sunlight. Things not directly manufactured (like food, natural fibers, and timber) can at least be tended and harvested by robots in place of farmers, ranchers, and fishers.
It isn't, because you still need raw materials which are an awful lot more exotic than you think they are (such as neodynium for example) and very large quantities of other materials, and there's still scarcity of those, and the sources of the materials are owned by a tiny ultra-wealthy fraction of the world's population. Then there's the problem of capital expenses; a fabrication plant capable of building state-of-the-art chips costs billions of dollars to build and lots of money to keep running, and that's with the specialist equipment required being bought in from third parties that can spread their development costs across multiple fabs and companies. Even normal robot factories are hardly cheap.

I would identify 3 broad areas that necessarily contribute to the cost of producing material goods. They are the costs of raw materials, energy, and labor. Supposing that robots can perform all labor necessary to produce anything that is manufactured today -- a big supposition, to be sure -- then we are left with costs of energy and raw materials.

Energy is effectively free because if robots can build anything for free, they can build solar panels, batteries, nuclear reactors, and other energy generation and storage devices too. The rate at which energy can be produced is still limited by thermodynamic considerations or (more pressingly) the available planetary surface area per person, but the cost of manufacturing and operating energy systems is zero.

Finally, what of raw materials? Today it is important to work concentrated ores to extract mineral products because energy, machinery, and labor have substantial costs. If those costs are near-zero than the initial concentration and distribution of mineral resources is much less important. Better to extract aluminum from backyard rocks using your free energy and unpaid robot-labor than to pay a bauxite mine owner for access to his more concentrated mineral resources.

With free energy and robot labor, the only mineral resources that aren't accessible from common rocks are those that are both rare on Earth and strongly concentrated by geochemical processes. This includes, in my opinion, tellurium, indium, bismuth, tungsten, silver, gold, and the platinum group metals. These metals are technologically useful but can be substituted in almost all applications at some modest cost to performance. It does not include relatively common and widely dispersed elements like gallium and the rare earth elements that nonetheless command a high price at present and thereby seem scarce. Neodymium itself, for example, is about 3 times as abundant as lead in the Earth's crust.

By way of example, look at this analysis from the USGS of basalt located near Portland, Oregon. There are over 480 trillion tons of similar basalt in the Columbia Plateau spread over thousands of square kilometers of the northwestern United States. One ton of this type of rock, literally more common than dirt, contains about $70 worth of minerals at current market prices (mostly from the vanadium, molybdenum, cobalt, and rare earth elements). The reason it's not exploited at present is that it costs more than $70 in machinery, labor, and energy to separate the desirable elements from bulk rock. But if the labor is as free as self-duplicating robots and the energy is as free as sunshine, these "rare and valuable" elements actually prove common and nearly as good as free.

This finally takes me back to my original statement: if you have robots that do nearly everything, including building copies of themselves, the price of most material goods collapses because they can be reproduced at nearly zero marginal cost, like MP3s. If the self-reproducing robotic systems have a small footprint it's conceivable that everyone could have one in their back yard. If they have a large footprint, they'll need a friendly nation to operate in, one that would benefit more from the abundant free energy and goods from "pirated" robotic systems than from adhering to international treaties about trade and intellectual property. Fortunately, there is no shortage of nations in the latter category, and their goods will cross borders regardless of law, just like Americans can get cheap (if not completely free) high-quality DVD bootlegs from Chinese suppliers. Either by vote or by violence, the robotic abundance will eventually spread worldwide, because there is no continent where intellectual property owners and the rich outnumber hourly workers and the poor.
evolve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700
Merit: 500


daytrader/superhero


View Profile
August 03, 2011, 03:24:21 AM
 #51

Technology apparantly has left you behind.  Perhaps in the 70's?

Again, thanks for playing.

just like i thought. you have absolutely nothing to add to the discussion. you've not even attempted to back up your point of view (hint: because you cant) and you haven't made a single response that has any amount of substance whatsoever (unless you count a shitty meme and sophmoric nuh-uhs as substance). 

as i said originally, there is no way we can have a rational discussion...someone who holds such irrational and illogical beliefs as the crazy assed shit you've said earlier in this thread isnt capable of it.

so, yeah. im done.


  We are being contaminated down to our very genetic structure to make sure we can no longer breed or rise up against oppression.
but good luck with the whole insanity thing, man...dont forget to put on your tinfoil hat (i hear the robot overlords cant read your mind when you wear it)

TheGer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 03, 2011, 03:37:27 AM
 #52

Lol I have mimiced back to you the same type of conversation tactic you have used all day.  If anyone has not added anything it is you.  You go out of your way to argue using platitudes and rhetoric just like a politician.  With the same talking points and catch phrases.  Go home and let the adults play now.



Technology apparantly has left you behind.  Perhaps in the 70's?

Again, thanks for playing.

just like i thought. you have absolutely nothing to add to the discussion. you've not even attempted to back up your point of view (hint: because you cant) and you haven't made a single response that has any amount of substance whatsoever (unless you count a shitty meme and sophmoric nuh-uhs as substance).  

as i said originally, there is no way we can have a rational discussion...someone who holds such irrational and illogical beliefs as the crazy assed shit you've said earlier in this thread isnt capable of it.

so, yeah. im done.


 We are being contaminated down to our very genetic structure to make sure we can no longer breed or rise up against oppression.
but good luck with the whole insanity thing, man...dont forget to put on your tinfoil hat (i hear the robot overlords cant read your mind when you wear it)


makomk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


View Profile
August 03, 2011, 01:37:36 PM
 #53

Energy is effectively free because if robots can build anything for free, they can build solar panels, batteries, nuclear reactors, and other energy generation and storage devices too. The rate at which energy can be produced is still limited by thermodynamic considerations or (more pressingly) the available planetary surface area per person, but the cost of manufacturing and operating energy systems is zero.
Assuming raw materials were free, energy could be pretty much free - but that's not a good assumption to make

Finally, what of raw materials? Today it is important to work concentrated ores to extract mineral products because energy, machinery, and labor have substantial costs. If those costs are near-zero than the initial concentration and distribution of mineral resources is much less important. Better to extract aluminum from backyard rocks using your free energy and unpaid robot-labor than to pay a bauxite mine owner for access to his more concentrated mineral resources.
There's a problem here. Remember that you haven't shown unconditionally that your scenario will lead to nearly-free energy; you've only shown it could do so long as raw materials are also free. In particular there's a hard limit: if it requires more energy to extract the raw materials required for a particular energy source and build it than that source of energy can supply in its lifetime then you're just going to have to find some other way of getting energy.

It's not trivial to build solar panels that can provide more energy than was needed to make them even if you're manufacturing them in an efficent way at central factories using the best sources of materials; your back-yard extraction and manufacture scheme isn't viable.

Edit: Oh, and one final thing:

Either by vote or by violence, the robotic abundance will eventually spread worldwide, because there is no continent where intellectual property owners and the rich outnumber hourly workers and the poor.
I can't imagine that being a terribly popular idea on this forum; one of the things most posters seem to agree on is that taking property from its owner by violence is always wrong, whether that's direct violence or the threat of Government action. In any case you're missing something important: if robots are plentiful and can do anything, they can act as a police force protecting the rich from the poor. I'd suggest reading Manna by Marshall Brain

Quad XC6SLX150 Board: 860 MHash/s or so.
SIGS ABOUT BUTTERFLY LABS ARE PAID ADS
ansible adams
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 52
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 04, 2011, 05:01:12 AM
 #54

Finally, what of raw materials? Today it is important to work concentrated ores to extract mineral products because energy, machinery, and labor have substantial costs. If those costs are near-zero than the initial concentration and distribution of mineral resources is much less important. Better to extract aluminum from backyard rocks using your free energy and unpaid robot-labor than to pay a bauxite mine owner for access to his more concentrated mineral resources.
There's a problem here. Remember that you haven't shown unconditionally that your scenario will lead to nearly-free energy; you've only shown it could do so long as raw materials are also free. In particular there's a hard limit: if it requires more energy to extract the raw materials required for a particular energy source and build it than that source of energy can supply in its lifetime then you're just going to have to find some other way of getting energy.

It's not trivial to build solar panels that can provide more energy than was needed to make them even if you're manufacturing them in an efficent way at central factories using the best sources of materials; your back-yard extraction and manufacture scheme isn't viable.

You are right, "back yard" is a bit hyperbolic way to describe it. I think you can successfully use lower-grade raw materials but I honestly don't know on how small a scale you can operate a polysilicon plant, aluminum refinery, or other important and energy-intensive processes before the efficiency falls off catastrophically. If it turns out that (say) you can't practically scale a silicon plant down below 100 kilograms per day, it's not a back yard operation. As mentioned above, the pirate-robot-factory systems might have to initially operate in countries with different national interests than the USA and its ilk if they are too large to be easily hidden, but the deflationary pressure will spread them and their products over time.

Quote
Either by vote or by violence, the robotic abundance will eventually spread worldwide, because there is no continent where intellectual property owners and the rich outnumber hourly workers and the poor.
I can't imagine that being a terribly popular idea on this forum; one of the things most posters seem to agree on is that taking property from its owner by violence is always wrong, whether that's direct violence or the threat of Government action. In any case you're missing something important: if robots are plentiful and can do anything, they can act as a police force protecting the rich from the poor. I'd suggest reading Manna by Marshall Brain

I have read Manna and the dystopian and utopian parts of it alike seem unrealistic to me because they require remarkable behaviors among millions of people. Apparently the middle class of the USA couldn't get their act together to vote for "lunatic fringe" (i.e. not corporate-owned) legislators to change the rigged game they were losing, even after they'd been forced into public housing. But a billion people agreed to make the Australia Project IPO by far the most successful of all time, even before it offered anything but an idea.

As for the popularity of taking what we want from the robot-owning overclass, even most of the libertarians here seem to think that intellectual property is nonsense. If an IP owner tries to send the police or his own private army after people "pirating" physical goods and/or the equipment used to manufacture them, I think any violence meted out by the "pirates" can be considered self-defense. Of course there is a different sort of dystopian scenario lurking here: if arbitrary manufacturing capabilities are widely dispersed and easy to duplicate, weapons become as easy to copy as any other product of comparable complexity. I could see protracted and tremendous violence if a lot of people with grievances (legitimate or otherwise) can get their hands on armed drones, missiles, mustard gas, etc.
Ridi
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84
Merit: 10


View Profile
August 04, 2011, 06:22:53 AM
 #55

Robots and technology in general are designed to serve the needs and wants of man.  As the capabilities of man increase so do the technologies.  Once upon a time someone discovered fire and how to sharpen a stick.  Tribes formed and people started settling down so people learned to farm and grind wheat.  Today we war across the world and fight diseases on a global level.  Technology in and of itself is not curious or ambitious. Technology can be designed, I am certain, to diagnose and treat polio.  It's not going to replace doctors any time soon. 

People decide where and when technology is needed.  It's only the people who weren't involved in the innovation that do not realize how much freedom and power this gives to people as individuals and a whole.

As for science serving governments.  The scientific community is terrifically neutral.  This neutrality allows government to use it however it likes, just as well as the people can.  For example, the current alcohol test used in urinalysis by most jurisdictions in the United States can detect alcohol consumption for up to five days (previously they could only detect alcohol consumption for up to 48 hours.)  Unfortunately this test can detect, but not discriminate from, alcohol absorption by the skin (as in using hand sanitizers or working with solvents in the work place) and levels of inhaled alcohol (solvents.)  For this reason it has a notoriously high false positive rate.  The American Psychological Association and other scientific interests have strongly indicated that the test is not effective evidence and does not prove alcohol consumption (a concern for probation violations.)  Even though this has been a consensus since very early in the test's development the government still insists on using the test that is most likely to put innocent people in jail.

Bottom line, look around you and stop being jealous of other peoples use of innovation.  Instead look for what you want in life and innovate your own world experience.

BITCOIN CROWN        |│        The new era of online gaming
[   PRE-ICO  |  LIVE   ]    [ AIRDROP | LIVE ]    [    ICO  |  May 15th, 2018    ]
WHITEPAPER             TWITTER             TELEGRAM             ANN THREAD
blogospheroid
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 133
Merit: 100


View Profile
August 04, 2011, 10:34:55 AM
 #56

The key question here is - What will the women want?

In the increasing automation scenario, I can visualise welfare being extended and taxation of capital increasing to mollify a majority of the population, who would have lost their jobs,  but I don't see how any government will handle relative differences, which are ofcourse, important to the mating game.

What are the criteria that the women would find attractive? That is what will determine the post-robotic economy of the future.
Ridi
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84
Merit: 10


View Profile
August 04, 2011, 02:39:34 PM
 #57

What are the criteria that the women would find attractive? That is what will determine the post-robotic economy of the future.

A spectrum of things will attract women, most often dependent on the financial level and beliefs of their parents.  (I.E. Douche-bags often call these women's 'daddy issues')

BITCOIN CROWN        |│        The new era of online gaming
[   PRE-ICO  |  LIVE   ]    [ AIRDROP | LIVE ]    [    ICO  |  May 15th, 2018    ]
WHITEPAPER             TWITTER             TELEGRAM             ANN THREAD
makomk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


View Profile
August 04, 2011, 02:42:48 PM
 #58

I have read Manna and the dystopian and utopian parts of it alike seem unrealistic to me because they require remarkable behaviors among millions of people. Apparently the middle class of the USA couldn't get their act together to vote for "lunatic fringe" (i.e. not corporate-owned) legislators to change the rigged game they were losing, even after they'd been forced into public housing. But a billion people agreed to make the Australia Project IPO by far the most successful of all time, even before it offered anything but an idea.
Of course they couldn't. That would require convincing over 50% of the population in a significant number of areas to vote for exactly one suitable candidate in each, with no campaign funding, despite the mass media being against them and attempting to discredit them, whilst somehow avoiding both fake "people's candidates" and corruption of the genuine ones that did get elected. If not enough people vote for the candidate, the ones that did risk causing a worse candidate to get in than if they'd stuck to the best of the mainstream choices. Worse still, at the point in his scenario where the unemployed masses are essentially being imprisoned there's no need to even convince them their vote means anything - it's not like they can rise up in revolt with their every action monitored for hints of "terrorist" activity, and hardly anyone would question this monitoring initially.

You also need to take into account aspirational effects - a lot of people are willing to vote in ways that benefit the rich and powerful at their own expense in the hope that one day they'll become rich and powerful, no matter how slim that hope. This phenomenon is a massive obstacle to grassroots political reform, but it might actually encourage investment in something like the Australia Project IPO even if that did offer nothing more than an idea.

It's actually very interesting that in this story voluntary self-organisation turns out so much better in the end than central government fiat.

As for the popularity of taking what we want from the robot-owning overclass, even most of the libertarians here seem to think that intellectual property is nonsense. If an IP owner tries to send the police or his own private army after people "pirating" physical goods and/or the equipment used to manufacture them, I think any violence meted out by the "pirates" can be considered self-defense.
While intellectual property could also pose an issue, the problem here is physical property: specifically, the robots themselves, the equipment needed to manufacture them, the raw materials to feed all this, and the land from which the raw material are mined. If all of this is in the hands of said robot-owning overclass, everyone else is screwed unless they can take it from them by force; I seem to recall most libertarians are against this.

Quad XC6SLX150 Board: 860 MHash/s or so.
SIGS ABOUT BUTTERFLY LABS ARE PAID ADS
johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1000


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
August 04, 2011, 09:00:04 PM
 #59

While intellectual property could also pose an issue, the problem here is physical property: specifically, the robots themselves, the equipment needed to manufacture them, the raw materials to feed all this, and the land from which the raw material are mined. If all of this is in the hands of said robot-owning overclass, everyone else is screwed unless they can take it from them by force; I seem to recall most libertarians are against this.

In a free market, you can always get the ownership of material/equipment/robot through trading. And the trading power will be decided by how much capital one have.  Those who have the capital today will become the robot-owning class tomorrow, but that is ok, as long as people have free access to the products created by those robots

Private ownership has been the driven power of economy for hundreds of years, I'm not sure if this still works in a robotic economy.

I think, if robot belongs to the government, then all those debt problem will be gone. Even all the government employees are replaced by robots and create a super high unemployment rate, since government can still provide good education/healthcare/social security...by using robots, everyone can still live a good life without working!







makomk
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


View Profile
August 04, 2011, 10:14:58 PM
 #60

In a free market, you can always get the ownership of material/equipment/robot through trading. And the trading power will be decided by how much capital one have.  Those who have the capital today will become the robot-owning class tomorrow, but that is ok, as long as people have free access to the products created by those robots
The trouble is that the capital-owning class that becomes a robot-owning class will have no reason to permit everyone else access to the products created by those robots, because they'll have nothing to offer in return. (Actually I can think of a handful of things they could offer, but most of them are really not very pleasant and there wouldn't be enough demand for them anyway.)

I think, if robot belongs to the government, then all those debt problem will be gone. Even all the government employees are replaced by robots and create a super high unemployment rate, since government can still provide good education/healthcare/social security...by using robots, everyone can still live a good life without working!
They could do... assuming that the government chose to serve the interests of the populace at large rather than a handful of very wealthy, very powerful individuals. This requires politicians to act against their own rational interests though; the handful of powerful individuals are much more capable of damaging their political career than the populace at large is, even though in theory everyone can vote.

Quad XC6SLX150 Board: 860 MHash/s or so.
SIGS ABOUT BUTTERFLY LABS ARE PAID ADS
newMeat1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 100



View Profile
August 04, 2011, 10:33:14 PM
 #61

Haha I didn't even bother reading this post. But if you've ever worked with robots, you would know that an incredible amount of human work goes into making a decent robot. And those are high-paying jobs   Smiley

With the work I do, you don't see robots replacing humans. The robots just do the job more precisely than humans ever could. There are still just as many humans needed to keep the robots moving.

bitplane
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 321
Merit: 250

Firstbits: 1gyzhw


View Profile WWW
August 04, 2011, 10:37:58 PM
 #62

The trouble is that the capital-owning class that becomes a robot-owning class will have no reason to permit everyone else access to the products created by those robots, because they'll have nothing to offer in return. (Actually I can think of a handful of things they could offer, but most of them are really not very pleasant and there wouldn't be enough demand for them anyway.)

I completely agree. Like I said in an earlier post, unless we completely reform our ideas of property the vast majority of us are doomed.
johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848
Merit: 1000


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
August 05, 2011, 12:23:32 PM
 #63

Haha I didn't even bother reading this post. But if you've ever worked with robots, you would know that an incredible amount of human work goes into making a decent robot. And those are high-paying jobs   Smiley

With the work I do, you don't see robots replacing humans. The robots just do the job more precisely than humans ever could. There are still just as many humans needed to keep the robots moving.

So, robots serve the capitalists and human serve the robot, there will be a new career: robot service Cheesy

On further thought, don't you think this is strange? You become the slave of what you created...

yupek
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 124
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 16, 2018, 11:44:58 AM
 #64

obviously detrimental to humans if the robot is employed. what we use as a human if the work is done by robot. there are still many negative sides if the robot is employed.

eLYQD
Decentralized Vaping Ecosystem Marketplace Based on Blockchain
CryptoConduct
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 154
Merit: 3


View Profile WWW
February 16, 2018, 12:16:15 PM
 #65

Using robots creates new professions, robots can't repair themselves. Robots help us to get rid from stupid work
daiminsho
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 29
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 16, 2018, 01:51:10 PM
 #66

Yes I think its possible with our growing society and most of the establishments are depending on technology because its faster and more efficient way to get a work done easily. People now a days wants everything to be done easily.
tartecyst7d
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 55
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 13, 2018, 06:32:43 AM
 #67

Particularly if the contest is based on the intelligence then certainly human will win but if it is based on physical ability then robots
WorldBiz project
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 70
Merit: 0


View Profile WWW
March 13, 2018, 06:41:01 AM
 #68

That is why we should switch from production to creation

🌱🌻🥕NAGRICOIN🍅🌽🌾
👉🏻🍏Nagri - we are what we eat, invest in it!🍏👈🏻
✔️Check out the link in 🌎
hugoworld
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 251



View Profile
March 13, 2018, 07:06:56 AM
 #69

Using robots creates new professions, robots can't repair themselves. Robots help us to get rid from stupid work

Completely, perfectly agreed . Robots will need human beings as far as Human beings need them. Because of this situation, Robots will  not completely be replaced with humankind . Both of the races will need each other for sure.


            ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
         █████████████████████████▄   
       ███████                 ██████
     ██████                      ██████
    █████      ███████████▄        ████
   ████      █████████████▀         ████
  ████      █████            ██      ████
 █████     ████     ▄▄▄      ███     ████
 █████     ████   ███████   ████
 ████      ████   ███████   ████
 ████      ████   ██████    ████      ███
  ████     █████   ▀▀▀▀     ████     ████
  ████      █████            ██      ████
   ████      █████████████▄         ████
    █████      ███████████▀        ████
     ██████                       ████
       ██████
         ██████████████████████▄
             ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
SKYFchain
█▀▀▀▀▀▀█
█  ▄██
██▀  █
█  ▄██
██▀  █
█  ▄██
██▀  █
█  ▄██
██▀  █
█      █
█▄▄▄▄▄▄█

█▀▀▀▀▀▀█
█  ▄██
██▀  █
█  ▄██
██▀  █
█  ▄██
██▀  █
█  ▄██
██▀  █
█      █
█▄▄▄▄▄▄█
MissIndependent
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37
Merit: 0

Pre-sale - March 18


View Profile
March 13, 2018, 07:21:18 AM
 #70

obviously detrimental to humans if the robot is employed. what we use as a human if the work is done by robot. there are still many negative sides if the robot is employed.

This is somehow felt nowadays. Jobs that are used to be for people are displaced with machines. We can't blame companies, they only looking for innovative ways to make workflow more productive and flawless.

KRIPTON ● THE BITCOIN OF AFRICA (https://kriptonofafrica.com/)
k00d8
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 79
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 13, 2018, 07:54:46 AM
 #71

I certainly don't think a 90% jobless rate is likely anytime soon. Even if we Progress greatly with robotics and AI, we will need MANY more people than most imagine to carry out service functions related to those robots. And then, of course, it is unlikely that the robots will take all our jobs, at least for a long time. And certain jobs will remain in human hands (politicians, etc.). How to prepare for it? We are trying but in some sense it is futile to overprepare because we will certainly fall short and some Things will have to be dealt with as and when they become a reality.

█ ▌▐▐ KEPLER // BRINGING AI & ROBOTICS TO THE BLOCKCHAIN▐ ▌▐ █ (http://keplertek.org/#)
vallentvi4
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 2


View Profile
March 13, 2018, 10:00:44 AM
 #72

certainly most likely will happen,
A great example in household needs. If we look at japanese, how do they create sex dolls for the Japanese population and that is legal? So that the robots can replace the sex needs of a partner if one of them is out of the house in a long time.
And other big industrialized countries that use robots. I think the company still has a solution for employees to not really become unemployed while working.
patarfweefwee
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 11


View Profile
March 13, 2018, 10:12:10 AM
 #73

Really depends on alot for factors. For example, it would greatly depend on the population of the earth when robots are used everywhere, next is how advanced are said robots and have they achieved singularity, lastly it would depend on the accessibility of these robots. If the population is decreased substantially say 1 billion then 90% of the population would actually be working on robotics. But i doubt that 90% of the population would be jobless.

squog
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 322
Merit: 100



View Profile
March 13, 2018, 10:16:53 AM
 #74

With the industrialization happened decades ago, it layed off alot of the workers. With the rise of moving production lines in the factories of manufacturers more workers we're layed off. As we used robotics alot more we're layed of. The rise of more sophisticated machines, more people got layed off. But more importantly, manual laborers are layed of not necessarily people who work on maintaining these machines and making them. 90% of the population being jobless because of machine is improbable

▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀     │      JINBI      │       T H E   G O L D E N   I C O     ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
████████████                     JOIN ICO  -  21st  J U N E                     ████████████
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄          Whitepaper       Telegram       Twitter       Reddit           ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
mmfiore
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 851
Merit: 502



View Profile
March 14, 2018, 12:14:34 AM
 #75

In my mind it goes like that :

Jobs are disappearing, and it's a good thing. We intended it.

We've been creating tools thus creating enough freetime to do something else than survive since the beggining.

And sure with technology andvancing, we're creating new kinds of tasks/labour, but not more than we're destroying.

So we're more and more people and proportionaly less jobs, so either :

- We divide the amout of work/person (reduction of global work time)
- We see keep looking at unemployment going up. (some rich as fuck (a tiny little fraction), and the rest living undecent lives)



        ▄██▄            ▄██▄
       ██  ███████████ ██  ██
        ▀██▀            ▀███▌
       ▄                  ▐██
     ▄██▀   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄        ▐██▄
    ▄██    ██▀ ▄▄▄▄         ▀▀
 ▄███▀     █ ▄█▀ ▄▄▄           ▄██▄
██  ██     █ █  █████  █ ▄    ██  ██
 ▀██▀            ▀▀▀ ▄██ █     ███▀
     ▄            ▄▄██▀ ▄█   ▄██▌
    ▀██▄          ▄▄▄▄▄█▀   ▄██
      ██▄                   ▀▀
       ▀███▄            ▄██▄
       ██  ██  ██████████  ██
        ▀██▀            ▀██▀


        ▄██▄            ▄██▄
       ██  ███████████ ██  ██
        ▀██▀            ▀███▌
       ▄                  ▐██
     ▄██▀   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄        ▐██▄
    ▄██    ██▀ ▄▄▄▄         ▀▀
 ▄███▀     █ ▄█▀ ▄▄▄           ▄██▄
██  ██     █ █  █████  █ ▄    ██  ██
 ▀██▀            ▀▀▀ ▄██ █     ███▀
     ▄            ▄▄██▀ ▄█   ▄██▌
    ▀██▄          ▄▄▄▄▄█▀   ▄██
      ██▄                   ▀▀
       ▀███▄            ▄██▄
       ██  ██  ██████████  ██
        ▀██▀            ▀██▀
.
PRE-REGISTER NOW FOR
THE MAIN TOKENSALE


██
██
██ ██
██ ██
██ ██
██ ██
██ ██
██ ██
   ██
   ██
.MONETIZE YOUR IOT DATA!.

Telegram
Twitter
▄▄███████████████████████████████████▄▄
██████████▀▀▀▀███████████▀▀▀▀██████████
█████████▌ ██          █▌ ██  █████████
██████████▄▄▄▄███████████▄▄  ▐█████████
█████████▀▀█████████████████  ▀████████
████████  ▄███▀ ▄▄▄▄█████████▌ ▀███████
██████▀  ▄██▀ ▄█▀ ▄▄██████████▄▄███████
███▀▀▀  ███▌ ▄█ ▄█▀▀▀███████████▀▀▀▀███
██▌ ██ ▐███▌ █▌ █ ▐█▌ █▌ █ ▐███  ██ ▐██
███▄▄▄▄███████████▄▄▄█▀ ▄█ ▐███▌  ▄▄███
███████▀▀██████████▄▄▄▄█▀ ▄███▀  ██████
███████▄  █████████▄▄▄▄▄▄████▀  ███████
████████▄  ▀█████████████████▄▄████████
██████████    ▀██████████▀▀▀▀██████████
██████████▌ ██ ▐█         ██ ▐█████████
███████████▄▄▄▄██████████▄▄▄▄██████████
▀▀███████████████████████████████████▀▀
strengthvoice6
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 26
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 14, 2018, 06:50:43 PM
 #76

It would be never possible because humans already has the key to the robot operation and their power source Wink
remarkableshrivel7
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 25
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 16, 2018, 02:15:34 PM
 #77

I think its yes because robots accuracy rate is much much more than humans
Thaliaismyname
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 88
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 16, 2018, 03:11:10 PM
 #78

Just at innovation removes certain jobs from the workforce, it also creates jobs elsewhere.machines have replaced humans for many decades but the social benefits are only partially distributed to those displaced.

GLOBEX SCI | PRE-ICO Feb 7th
wistfuljob
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 39
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 17, 2018, 06:19:36 PM
 #79

Ofcourse yes, robots are evolving day by day and someday it will have its own artificial intelligence to overcome human
furrystocks
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 26
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 18, 2018, 05:47:41 PM
 #80

I don't know about future. Anything can happen at any nick of time nobody can predict beforehand!
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!