It is estimated that 73 million jobs in the US are projected to be lost to automation in 2030
According to the McKinsey Global Institute, nearly half of all the work we do will be able to be automated by the year 2055
Realistically, how do we stop mass poverty and homelessness due to automation losses, the only way I see to avoid this is through a universal basic income.
Automation will no doubt create SOME jobs, but it would only take 1 guy to take care of a production line of 20 or so automated workers, so the majority of people, especially old who are not college educated will be replaced by automation.
How do we make it so automation serves the average person and not just the mega rich?
 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
|
if there are no jobs then everyone can just play the stock market
Market is fixed by hedge funds market makers and other whales and it’s against the law but SEC doesn’t do shit, anyone who has rubbed shoulders with or worked directly in any or the above knows that’s a fact of life no debate to be had
Rich people are good people. They're all nice guys and I wouldn't worry about it. Just let them automate that shit away and wait for UBI.
If rich people didn't need you to buy their products they would unironically rather watch you get eaten alive by hyenas (most of them atleast)
I'm not leaving the future of humanity to a bunch of fricking psychopaths.
>pic
he didn't work hard enough
he was a lazy, stupid person
Maybe, but rich people didn't give him any favors so why would they give some to you?
if humanity doesn't understand the nature of the psychopaths that rule it then it doesn't deserve to continue existing
What are you going to do next? Most people today hate rich to some extent and barely tolerates rich that throw away their money for mostly good causes, like MrBeast.
what the hell is that picture please give more seems interesting
Automation and economies of scale are driving the cost of capital, and therefore capital-intensive goods, down. It used to be that a 3D Printer that could print engineering-grade materials cost $100,000. Now you can achieve 80% of that functionality on a $300 machine, and 100% on a $1000 machine.
This is happening in multiple hardware categories: milling, turning, sheet cutting, molding, and light-duty robotics. We are on the cusp of a dramatic restructuring thanks to crashing capital costs.
Pic Rel: one of the printers in question, MSRP of $199. Add $100 in aftermarket parts and it will easily handle extremely durable materials.
THIS.
In 10-15 years, we'll be printing stuff only imaginable in the movies.
Not just printing. It used to cost half to a full million dollars or more to equip a decent machine shop, today you can do it for the price of a car. The implications for small businesses and startups are immense.
Yeah, I am watching a small bus engineers, a company of 2, who play around with this.
It is easy and it is amazing what can be done already.
They are telling me , 10-15 years.
My man, the first home EDM machines are starting to roll out. The time is here, now. Variety is a little limited, but the time is today.
>This will in turn enable the facilitation of hyper-pirate raiding parties sent out from Brazil or Africa towards a unarmed and weak Europe.
Or Raiders from the coast of Oakland?
https://nypost.com/2023/09/12/pirates-of-california-boat-raiders-plunder-bay-area-marina/
You mean the multi-needle embroiderers? Give it time, it needs someone to notice the opportunity for disruption.
Yes, this "restructuring" makes it possible for even a warlord in a Brazilian or Nigerian favela to consolidate a powerful industrial base. This will in turn enable the facilitation of hyper-pirate raiding parties sent out from Brazil or Africa towards a unarmed and weak Europe.
damn shame industrial machinery will never come down in costs
>tfw $8000 for a good sewing machine
This guy f*bs.
(FABS. get it?)
Yes ubi and then
Problem is that most income producing jobs are repetitive motion. Computers and a robot arm is able to outcompete a human at anything repetitive motion.
Problem is humans are chaos engines because that is what powers evolution. The robot has to be inside a building working under tightly controlled situations.
How many jobs were automated from 1970 to 2000? Did everyone become unemployed as a result? No. More people are working than ever. Weird.
>how many jobs were automated from 1970 to 2000? Did everyone become unemployed as a result?
In the past 20 years it is estimated that the USA lost 1.7 million jobs to automation
https://teamstage.io/jobs-lost-to-automation-statistics/#:~:text=Automation%20has%20made%20millions%20of,for%20the%20past%2020%20years.
So 1.7 million in 20 years, compared to 73 million in the next SEVEN.
This is completely different anon, a whole new beast.
why didn't you answer my question?
Because more jobs were created after the agricultural revolution anon.
How many jobs do you think will be created by automation? Again, it only takes 1 dude to babysit 20 automated workers, we're going to lose far more jobs than we gain moron.
>Because more jobs were created after the agricultural revolution anon.
Oh...you mean jobs don't just exists but are created?
>How many jobs do you think will be created by automation?
I dunno. How many people work in the automotive industry? That didn't exist 130 years ago. Same as anything requiring electricity.
>Oh...you mean jobs don't just exists but are created?
How are you just getting this?
>I dunno. How many people work in the automotive industry? That didn't exist 130 years ago. Same as anything requiring electricity.
The automotive industry is the largest adopter of automation lmao, 40% of the jobs that used to be there are now automated.
https://zipdo.co/statistics/robotics-in-automotive-industry/#:~:text=The%20use%20of%20robotics%20in,the%20total%20supply%20in%202020.
>40% of the jobs that used to be there are now automated.
so why isn't unemployment through the roof now?
>so why isn't unemployment through the roof now?
Because automation is only speeding up now? Did you not what what I put before?
In the past 20 years it is estimated that the USA lost 1.7 million jobs to automation. So 1.7 million in 20 years, compared to 73 million in the next SEVEN.
Learn to read please
sounds like productivity will explode then, just like during the industrial revolution
>sounds like productivity will explode then, just like during the industrial revolution
Yeah except the industrial revolution took 1760 - 1840 and created MORE jobs.
Machine automation isn't going to create more jobs, it's going to take them away and most of it will be happening in the next 7 years instead of the span of a century.
The revolution created factory lines that supported hundreds of people, machine and AI automation won't do that, it will get rid of those people and only require 1 foreman on the floor.
>created MORE jobs
Everyone was a subsistence farmer before the industrial revolution. Jobs that came with it didn't exist. It simply means we don't need an expanding population anymore
>Machine automation isn't going to create more jobs
how do you know that?
It's pretty much common sense.
Look at the already automated parts, look at the car factories.
Screw driving, windshield installation and wheel mounting are all automated, the only job they create is one or two dudes who go around making sure everything is working correctly.
If a robot can make a fricking i9 9900k chip AND also be your grocery worker, teacher, physician etc, what job do you think automation is going to create that won't be able to be automated?
so you don't know then and are just talking out of your ass? Why did the industrial revolution create more jobs? How does mass adoption of labor saving machines create more jobs anon? And why is it totally different now?
>so you don't know then and are just talking out of your ass?
Black person take a LOOK with your EYES at the already automated jobs
DID THESE CREATE MORE JOBS THAN THEY ELIMINATED?
I already explained to you how the industrial revolution created more jobs you fricking idiot.
I dunno...you said the industrial revolution created more jobs so I'm asking you how that is possible...and you're not answering.
Holy shit are you this dumb?
Less farmers = more people can go to manufacturing
industrial revolution is not the same as automation because they created textiles, iron and steel, coal mining, and more. These industries required a large workforce to OPERATE the machines, this created MORE JOBS THAN THERE WERE BEFORE
The development of steam engines and the expansion of railways and canals required a significant labor force to build, maintain, and operate transportation networks.
As people moved from rural areas to urban centers to work in factories. The growth of cities led to the demand for services, like housing, food production, transportation, and retail. This resulted in the creation of jobs in these sectors.
technological innovations and inventions like developments in machinery, telecommunications, and scientific research created employment opportunities for engineers, scientists, and other skilled workers.
The expansion of industrial activities required the development of supporting industries, such as banking, insurance, and logistics.
The mass production of materials led to consumer goods like clothing, household items, and appliances, made these products more affordable and accessible to a broader population. This, in turn, created jobs in retail and distribution.
Notice how these are ALL jobs that can be automated now? Every single fricking one of them?
The industrial revolution was slow, took over a century and created WAY more jobs than it eliminated. By 2055 50% of all jobs are expected to be gone, thats 3 decades anon, WAY faster than the industrial revolution, and again, if a robot can be your grocery worker, teacher, physician etc, what job do you think automation is going to create that won't be able to be automated?
so why is it different now?
Because the industrial revolution led to more materials to a market that was not able to be automated.
We are now in a market where 50% of jobs will be automated by 2050.
Again, answer it this time, if a robot can be your grocery worker, teacher, physician etc, what job do you think automation is going to create that won't be able to be automated?
but why won't more jobs be created like as happened during the industrial revolution?
Read
nah
I had a feeling you were a moron but now you just confirmed it
thanks for playing anon.
m'kay
>but why won't more jobs be created like as happened during the industrial revolution?
Why won't those new jobs be automated as soon as, or even before, they ever even appear?
Is there some reason to pretend that new, as-of-yet-unimagined jobs are somehow immune to automation, or so difficult that they will take longer to automate?
If there are such jobs, why would there be enough of them to go around?
You people just aren't very good at critical thinking. You can't ask the right questions, you can't even instinctively grope your way towards these questions. But somehow you're going to be the only ones who can do this job that an engineer can't figure out how to make a robot do it in the first 10 minutes that he tries?
It's okay Jamal, you'll burn in the race riots before you have to worry about thinking critically about anything along with the other useless eaters so it really doesn't concern you either way lol
Not a grocery worker, not a teacher, not a physician.
What's your job? There's probably some stats on its safety to automation.
because its already happening
most of the jobs shifted to service economy so you are forever a wageslave on a shitty dead end job in sales/logistics that only only exists because of a need to give people some occupation and income
and there will be new unnecessary jobs created just for that reason
>1 foreman
You're wrong about this.
The correct approach to an automation revolution is some form of collective specialized experience and method adaption of how to produce a product manually, through practice, then these people need to be skilled in teaching said method.
That being said almost everyone is terrible at the above mentioned skills. So the best variant isn't coming soon. We're getting an overpriced variant, in which immoral and wicked people are going to be overpaid to produce a system.
Of course there will be all kinds of new meme jobs.
The problem is that the middle class loses all investments they made in professional careers.
They are probably doing more damage than if they would torch all owner-occupied middle class real estate.
>so why isn't unemployment through the roof now
It is. Like inflation, the government does its best to obfuscate or outright lies to hide the true numbers. So that 3.4% rate they crow about does not include anyone who has given up and not actively looked for work in 4 weeks. They’re listed as not in the labor force and not counted, and there are millions of them. The labor force participation rate is the lowest that it’s been since the 50s, before women entered the workplace.
>So 1.7 million in 20 years, compared to 73 million in the next SEVEN.
We don't have 73 million jobs to be lost to automation. There AREN'T ANY.
Please list here a factory of 100,000 assembly workers. (you can't).
Now , we have to have 730 of those factories to lose 73 mln jobs.
It is clearly a lie. It's a large enough number to scare people.
They mean brain work automation, professional services.
>They mean brain work automation, professional services.
I am going to tell you a little secret.
For instance. There's a bunch of forms that go around.....let's say during a house sale, there are a few steps.
The "brain automation" is done to India. Prajeets do work as cheap labor. The existing AI can't touch any of this and won't be able to in the next 10 years for sure.
You can't also automate healthcare, although you will massively improve XRay and blood work analysis since AI could be trained.
Again, there going to be a lot of "prajeet brain automation".
Why do you just assume that it’s going to be factory jobs that are automated away, anon? They’ve been working on automating things like warehouse jobs, stocking store shelves, and fast food for years.
And AI is going to eliminate a frickton of white collar and office jobs. Writers are already being replaced by LLMs for simpler tasks like writing articles and study guides. Anything that relies on pattern recognition is going away, because we can create AI expert systems that outperform humans every single time. The medical fields are going to be crushed outside of the hands-on jobs like surgeons. We’ve had expert systems that could outperform doctors at medical diagnoses for years now. Software developers are going to get hit as well. People are already using AI to automate basic code creation. And it’s writing better code than the Pajeets.
And yeah, some jobs will be created for the people needed to build and maintain that shit, but it will be at least an order of magnitude less than the jobs eliminated.
I added some here:
>automating things like warehouse jobs, stocking store shelves, and fast food for years.
Yeah, those could be in large warehouses like Amazon and Walmart.
>Anything that relies on pattern recognition is going away, because we can create AI expert systems that outperform humans every single time
No they won't. You can't create AI lawyer, you can't create an AI doctor. Your AI can't drive as if you turn it on in Tesla right now it would kill you (guess how I know, it nearly killed me and 3 other guys just by going 5 lights up the street).
> Software developers are going to get hit as well.
That is extremely moronic. AI is worked on by software developers. If you copy paste code from StackOverflow like a typical prajeet, then your job will go away.
But the reality is will IMPROVE production and speed and quality of the code that GOOD PROGRAMMERS produce. And as a result, there will be better code and after that likely even more sofware engineers. Because let's face it, every car has hardware, microprocessors , OS and basically every car is a big computer.
> We’ve had expert systems that could outperform doctors at medical diagnoses for years now.
For XRays for sure. Nowhere else.
>You can't create AI lawyer,
Beg to differ.
Newer machine-learning models can easily do any juden job, paper-shuffling and decision-making based on precedent (legal nonsense) and learn and store more of it than any human so making a lawyer as an app is possible now.
Not with anything based on obsolete neural-network and deep-* shit but the newer systems currently only used in military systems could easily learn to be a lawyer.
We could replace entire tiers of corporations and government with software with ease.
No it can't. As you correctly stated it's a language model. If you tell a language model a hundred times that the right way to address people is by calling them Black person as a greeting, your oh so faultless language model is going to go out there and commit mass-racism.
A language model is the lowest form of robotics and automation. Stop believing in dumb memes please.
>No it can't.
You are misinformed.
I am not talking about what you are aware of.
>
"There is more in heaven and here on Earth than is dreamed of in your philosophy, Horatio."
Splitting the difference: AI can create an army of clerks that fill out paperwork perfectly, and know when to call an actual lawyer for help if they hit an out of context problem.
I cannot tell you but we've moved on from neural networks and anything you can google about in the news.
This is our world now.
correction: it's the world of anyone with a GPU faster than a set baseline and enough know-how to train a model
>train a model
Wrong technology.
Gavrilo Princip did not need a locomotive gun to set events in motion that changed the world. AGI is very powerful, but sometimes a fancy speak-and-spell is the right tool for the job.
True.
Again showing a total disregard for the reality of the human to human connection.
Nobody wants electronic lawyers. They want a 2nd person by their side who sits with them in court, convinces them of great ideas and is their guy / gal.
This is what you techbros don't get. Nobody WANTS your hunk of junk. And if people don't buy it, you're not going to get anywhere with it.
Simple as.
You tell them. Not only is it not desired by anyone, it's also plainly not possible to be done in a reasonable amount of time.
More bullshit talk. Human interaction is the one thing you cannot commodify and Big Corporate isn't interested in doing so, either. In fact, more than ever is their desire to get people on board with them, to the point they call their promoters and sales managers in corporate meetings their "Clerics", the customers "their believers".
Human interaction will more valuable than ever before, but it will not be commodified at all. That cannot be achieved.
>Nobody wants electronic lawyers.
Yeah. We don't want cars just faster horses.
Piss off with your human-centric nonsense.
The moment your phone bleeps saying it needs recharging you plug it in; "FEED ME!". Stimulus -> Response.
>people don't want
Sure they will. They already do.
Okay. Next time someone chops half of your knee off, runs away and you press charges, tell me what you do.
I bet 10 bucks you call the police and right thereafter you look for a lawyer. Even if there was a perfect valid piece of code out there giving you the right answer, you would not want to fill out all the bullshit forms, make the calls and do the legwork. You'd also want to talk to someone.
I don't care what you say, you have exposed your hubris, larper neet. And I need exchange no more words with thine miserable self.
You Britbong couldn't even keep your own countryside pajeetfree. Your future is rice and curry, not technological gadgets.
Okay so that's what you meant after all. I wasn't sure how you meant the commodify.
I wholeheartedly agree then. I see most industries stepping into the direction of more human interaction, not less.
The difficult part will be to quantify it.
Things like sales numbers and report cards with rating systems will play a role, but they are no perfect tool as they don't express long-term satisfaction with services.
Sorry I got at you, I kinda misread you there.
WTF are you talking about the past and present for?
You know I'm right.
>pajeets
>countryside
?
You've lost the argument if you resort to that. Thank You for conceding. I accept your defeat.
NOW YOU KNOW WHY WE BUILT THEM AND YOU COULDN'T.
This is the most stupid larp I have seen in a while. Built what? You built nothing.
Britain was an empire, now it's a colony. I don't know who you want to scare with this AI stuff, maybe other schizos. If that's your goal, good job.
But if you work at any branch of the private sector, you know those ideas don't hold up to scrutiny. Nobody will rely on AI or machines full-time, only as auxillary means. We've had that. We talked about it. Denying it won't make the truth go away.
There won't be iRobot in reallife. Just more mundane work for you to do. NOW GET BACK IN THAT CAGIE YOU WAGIE.
It is unimportant that you know.
You are unimportant and I have no desire to boast to you of my work.
Believe what you want. You are nothing to me. Goading won't help you either.
>That cannot be achieved.
By losers like you.
Step aside. Future's coming through... to exterminate Black folk and track israelites on the FLIR.
Eh, you are on the one hand saying people want a human to human connection, no one wants electronic lawyers, etc.
THAT is what I am saying.
What part of "Human capital at its highest ever" didn't make it through google translate, fren?
>Again showing a total disregard for the reality of the human to human connection.
> and know when to call an actual lawyer for help if they hit an out of context problem.
No one likes paperwork, which is a task that consumes enormous amounts of lawyers' time. I specifically said the systems are good enough to know when a human's intervention is required, in the context of paperwork. These systems cut down on low-value human time and increase availability of high-value human time.
>Nobody wants electronic lawyers.
I've love to be able to ask a legal question for free and because the AI is well integrated being able to not only to answer my question but also make it binding on the legal system. Right now you can literally ask your government the keeper of laws if something is legal and the best answer they can give you for complex legal questions is "uh... we don't know try it out and find out".
>we don't know try it out and find out
That is a big one.
While it casually undermines all legitimation of the current system (not that anyone would care in clown world),
it will also keep AI from doing legal work, because it is culturally only allowed for humans to make up bullshit.
AI would have to answer correctly, but there aren't even definitions for many legal terms.
Also, many cases have contradicting laws that apply, in which case everyone pulls a straight face,
and the most important law is arbitrarily pulled out of the arse of the judge or the bureaucrat if you don't have the time to go to court over it.
The ATF had for a long time the ability to ask them questions about gun laws because they are equal parts stupid and convoluted in the USA. Then they changed that and now they just say hey yeah if you want to find out why don't you try it out and send us a sample the worst that happens is we lock you up for life because you put a pin in that gun in the illegal spot rather than the legal spot and we can't tell you what that spot is until after you do it and maybe maybe not commit a crime. Fricking c**ts.
buncha dog shootin..... i dont hate the atf
BACK ON TOPIC somebody remedy class mobility with automated archtecture not buildings but societal use those neurons brothas
I would scrap the department of education, and make a new department of virtual education. Schools would be repurposed as public meeting spaces or libraries. all education would be done remotely and on demand. Education would be tied directly to welfare. Internet would be covered as a basic human right so all people would have access to internet education at any time. Basic income would be paid on the condition that the recipient devotes time to online study in the pursuit of employment in desirable fields. They could even add incentive programs that pay more to pregnant women or training in fields that are in highest demand.
My plan solves a lot of problems: The shitty education system in the USA, the lack of skilled workers, the population bust, unemployment due to automation. Probably a few others I didn't think of too.
>I would scrap the department of education, and make a new department of virtual education.
Basically Ready Player One, style VR education.
ed dept belongs in hell however an mproved version requires billions every developed country needs top change it HOWEVER
your talking shit if u say schools suck
It's just inefficient and doesn't leverage modern technology. We're using an education system from the 1700's in 2023.
The system I envision, the teachers would have to teach class once, and record it. This would be the virtual class and students would be paid for attendance. After the initial production, the teacher is available in some sort of group chat for any virtual students who have a question about the lesson, although ChatGPT could probably handle a lot of questions for them. The human element of having a person listen to you and communicate face to face is a valuable service and should be maintained. Automation isn't always going to be better if it loses the human interaction we crave. Education would be much more personalized. Much more efficient. I think back to my education. We had multiple 'study halls' per day, which translates to 45 minutes where nobody pays attention to a room full brats. I often had classes that were of no importance to me such as gym class. I suppose I was supposed to get some socialization out of it, but I mostly just learned to hate all the dumb buttholes I was stuck with for most of each weekday.
Have you considered buying picrel recently?
I surely have.
I am watching a small company and a few software engineers to try and automate a narrow field of mortgage docs with AI.
While there's some progress, it is very slow.
>pick a legal document
>it can be in 50 different states
>and 3000 different counties
>with different laws
>you have to read and understand legal jargon specific to this one out of 3000 counties and 10000 israeli lawyers.
>and then understand its legal meaning
You can't.
>You can't.
THEY can't... because their work is based on;
>McCulloch and Pitts (1943)
>Rosenblatt for the USNavy
>Minsky at MIT
>Hebb in Canada
...which we all now know to be somewhat incorrect and incomplete.
Which is likely why they fail.
They fail before this.
Get a 30 page legal document. Scan it with a scanner into a PDF file. Then try to recognize it.
>are there signatures and initials?
>are they straight? on every page?
>can you recognize fields that are initials and signatures
>is document scanned well? every page? anything is crooked or unreadable / cut out?
>is font funny and unreadable
etc.
A good percentage of the docs will fail even before you get to text recognition.
> especially old who are not college educated will be replaced by automation
Haha, no. AI is better at automating highly skilled work.
Basically anyone who graduated and isn't a millionaire yet is fricked, at least wasted years to decades in a now useless career.
>How many jobs were automated from 1970 to 2000? Did everyone become unemployed as a result? No. More people are working than ever. Weird.
We paid women to go to work and sit in offices doing 2 hours of work over a 40hr work week.
In service. Not manufacturing.
over 50% of the population farmed 100 years ago. 200 years ago and it was over 80%. Why isn't everyone unemployed now?
Automation coming makes Mads immigration extra stupid.
That many people unemployed, they’ll either vote to tax and redistribute or simply organize and take wealth.
>simply organize and take wealth
the US expects combat robots in the next 10-15 years, just the same time when automation will take over 30% of the workforce.
rebellion only worked cause the populace outnumbered the elite, when they can pump out murderbots we might see a new story.
Basic Income. Not Universal Basic Income. Only useful and valuable people should receive money and sustenance. People can make themselves more valuable through things like education. But education can be free or subsidized. Who ever privately owns the AI will own the world, even I'd it is AI themselves. We will have to think more tribally if we are to survive. If no one gets paid money goods and services can not be purchased. The economy will come to a halt and crash. If the owners of AI are White and pro-White(Not race traitors) it will be in their best interest to consider the whole human tribe.
>People can make themselves more valuable through things like education
Not in a world of thinking machines.
Machines don't receive BI. They are the slaves.
if*
Every white man could have made 200k a year letting robots they invenr do the work for them If they didn't let israelites import shitskins to drive down wages
You know robots, programs, and ais will replace both the law enforcers and the spy Black folk online too. It's so funny watching the cattle graze a pay check until their inevitable and fateful day of getting pistoned in the head with a bolt. Inevitable is is for they do their sufferings and toils daily to graze for a paycheck content until the advancements in tech consequently replace them too and given enough time, persecute them when they didn't even know they were being watched.
Look at CCTV tech and facial recognition software. Remote backdoors in HARDWARE and all manner of data collecting and tracking software/spyware. Entire organizations shall replaced once all this infrastructure is operating on the control of an Ai/program while robodogs and robocops enforce the law against the cattle humans.
It's a nice fantasy, but reality looks different:
A) As Henry Ford once said, what's the point in an economy where the people can't afford your car? Literally robotonomics can't exist without people buying the shit they produce.
Hence it will not come to be. Either the robots will be used to seize the means or production but Bullshit jobs will multiply as to still allow for a wagie check OR the ultra rich will actually exterminate us as foretold, but then there won't be machines for production either because there is no need. Mass production was, as the name implies, created so things could be produced at mass for masses. Without masses you don't need mass production.
No matter what future pans out, there is no robots creating everything with everyone else having nothing. It literally cannot exist because it violates every known rule of Supply and Demand.
B) Have you seen the actual state of robots and AI? They're dreadfully moronic in many ways.
All it's good for is facial recognition and a bunch of legacy features on your phone. But it's not as strong as they want you to know.
Robots replacing you is a literal psyop to demoralize you, just like the Black Black person Penis meme.
C) If there are more machines and more robots and more AI, it follows that there must be more people overseing their work, correcting faulty code and more.
TL;DR: Stop being a bunch of weebs and start looking at the real world like real people. Your inexperience with anything life is showing, BOT.
They keep shoving robots into people's personal lives in grocery stores and on the streets regardless of what the public wants just to get le normalization phase over.
So what? Every single instance of actual automation happening is meme tier, fake and gay or was already automated before:
>The self-checkouts at grocery chains:
They are literally ordinary cash registers with the scanning area reversed for single person use.
It leads to an increase in theft is. as I always argue, it's not the final solution but only a half-automation. The future grocery chain has a few cashiers and a few self-checkouts. Not all self-checkouts. There is 1-2 employees overseeing the self-checkouts so theft doesn't happen, proving the meme that automation doesn't reduce employee count true. Instead of being the cashier, they now check if you cash out correctly. Oh and you still need the other serfs to fill up the grocery isles. No automation for that.
>Boston Dynamics Robot dog patrolling the street:
Cannot stop any crime whatsoever, is relatively powerless and can be shoved around.
It's only use is documentation and profiling of crimes, not it's prevention. When people are being b***hes to Big Gov or Big Corp, they will still send out real boys and girls to bear your butt with a stick and taze granny to death.
>Self-driving cars:
Already half-banned and limited to tool assisted driving. Actually sleeping behind the wheel gets you ticketted by police and called a bad driver. gg automation. Another one you already lost before "it began".
>Picture of robots in large facilities producing goods:
Has been a thing since the 70's and continues to be a thing in the future. Literally not new at all, just more psyops bullshit to get you sad and hopeless.
I'm not saying machines have no uses. But they are:
A) Costly!
B) Need maintenance, forget the self-repair meme.
C) Need to be controlled.
In short: Automation will always be an auxillary boost to your human work force, not it's main driver.
What's more, there is work in producing the parts and the machines itself. See Boston Dynamics.
Pic related is oh so great AI-generated picture. gg
Old people that have been working sales all their life aren't going to learn how to code, neither are librarians or cooks or lawyers.
This is quite literally just the "learn to code" meme all over again.
Hi anon, that's not what I said. Also, in the context of this thread, I don't think we are talking about sales or librarians or lawyers. Those things have already been automated.
However, if I need to set up a manufacturing cell that involves welding, I need a welder to verify everything on that line. The welder's livelihood becomes more crucial. The robot cannot weld at the human level, but it is good for volume jobs.
Human expertise is not going away. The move to automate is based on the three Ds. Dull, Dirty, and Dangerous. Things that we WANT the robots to do.
We are going to commodify human interaction in the trades, not eliminate it.
If someone is in this thread that truly believes robots can do 100% equivalent work in the next two decades, they are mistaken. The "old people" still working will need a skill bump, but they will not be removed from the trenches.
>Things that we WANT the robots to do
No, we don't want robots to do anything. We don't want them to exist in the first place. It's the rich trying to convince the rest that robots are somehow good.
>The "old people" still working will need a skill bump
They will not get any "skill bump". Also, it doesn't seem like you know what "automation" really refers to. It refers to the perception of the top management and shareholders as to how many workers they need. I've seen it first hand.
>create an app that "automates" part of administrative process - in reality it does by 0.5%
>fire 15 people
>create another app
>fire 15 people
>create bigger app
>fire 40 people
You're great. This is hilarious. I literally work in thie field every day. WE do want the robots to crawl 1.5 miles through a fricking pipeline to test ductility, WE do want the robots to make repeatable 2 meter long beads when welding perfectly, over and over again. WE do want the robots to descend to 100m and resume a search pattern. YOU? On your couch? Do you? Guess what? WE do not care.
>They will not get any "skill bump".
They are getting this very thing right now. I have 50+ yo.s learning to input to different CSMs, work with cobots, and all at the community college level in the US and EU.
>administrative process
administration within manufacturing and healthcare is nothing more than a bureaucratic wank stain.
As a Sales guy I can tell you we are not going anywhere. In fact it will be the job of Sales people to convince the companies to take up the new hunk of junk of the day and replace the old one with, a job that will be tough as they argue "but my old one still works".
It will be no different from selling laptop to end consumers, just more corporate bullshit and polite phrases thrown around.
The more you make these unrealistic predictions, the more you out yourself as inexperienced when it comes to these matters. Automation will transform some industry branches a little, but it's not the revolution you think it is.
The big "World will change forever" psyop is really just a huge advertizing campaign in it's own right for Big Corporate to jump on WEFs and Big Banker Larry's Fink ESG investing peen, a strategy that is *NOT* working as well as they'd have you believe.
ESG investing is being a called the great loser of the 2020's so far. Nobody even wants to be an ESG Compliance Manager, and those who do get into that role are hired by companies so they can figure out the best way to bullshit around with the ESG report to get better loans.
It's all a giant nothing burger with a few new job opportunities and a bunch of sales pitches, unironically waved in your faith not by "The New World Order", that's actually the order of old, probably their most well-kept secret.
Nothing new about them, they are just changing their dress and hope you won't notice the princess is the king without clothes.
30% of sales jobs are currently exposed, who knows what that could be by 2050, but you do have SOME security.
No, it won't. Sales literally will go nowhere as long as there is buyers.
This is an unspoken truth everyone in sales knows, but you sell via the person and trust, not the product.
If you got a phone call with a monotone, robotic voice tomorrow or a robot knocking on your door or you entered a store and some robot was showcasing a product - Would you buy that? The likely answer is no.
Most customers can't even stomach a chatbot for customer support. Sales is 100% dependend on there being a guy or girl with Charisma. A robot CANNOT take that work.
Like that, there is a lot of nuances to many industries where robotbros who are the next iteration of cryptobros, show their clear lack of understand for the work and what it requires.
Most jobs aren't going to go anywhere, they will just be tool assisted more - IF the job of that company even wants to invest in robots.
Full automation is a sci-fi dream that will die as quickly as flying cars and hoverboards. There is no debating this universal truth and all who fall for this automation psyop will be as dumbfounded as the vaxxcattle. Just that luckily this time there isn't a large penalty for being wrong on the matter. You either are correct or you feel stupid for having said something silly a few years back. *shrug*
>If you got a phone call with a monotone, robotic voice tomorrow
Have you not been getting those new robo callers? Shit is actually uncanny valley.
They sound ALMOST like real people, in 2013 there were already robocallers that deny they're robots, shits insane.
Yes and as you correctly stated they are uncanny valley and nobody likes them.
Case closed? Case closed.
You buy from people you like, not from creepy zombot robots that treat you to a garbled mess of a message.
Also you are wrong about this robot at the telephone. Read the comments on the video.
>What's probably happening in this video is the following:
>The 'robot' is actually just a soundboard (a collection of pre-recorded voice lines), being activated using hardcoded triggers with a voice audio interpreter to hear what scam victim (the guy) is saying. The code will then analyse the voice, and pick an appropriate voice line to play (based on written code). Alternatively, there is a real person on the other side of the call, who most likely has a thick accent, often associated with scammers (i.e. Indian and Nigerian accents). They use the soundboard so they sound more believable.
didn't read because you're a moron.
the job of a sales person is to identify markets and potential customers and then sell shit to them. one could easily frick a majority of sales jobs by simply creating a unified market/supply-and-demand app. think about it like amazon for literally everything. i don't need somebody to sell me things if i can simply type what i need and then get a list of what's available.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
The market of a Sales Person usually already exists and in a few cases where it doesn't, there is still already an established niche the company wants you to get into.
But the majority of the job is to build a trust-based relationship with the customer. You won't make a sale with some weirdo app. A unified market for everything? How would that even work.
Please, I know other Germposters who aren't me aren't the brightest lightbulbs, but you grant my country's flag a new record for sillyness.
You can't universally create an app for everything that sales to people when they at first don't even want something sold to them to begin with.
That's the entire point in sales. You get people on board who originally aren't. If they were, you weren't there for the sale because the product would sell by itself, just standing in some isle.
the product would be required to speak for itself making humanity better if equal choice is available
yes it goes against human nature but 1 gen after ever lasting lightbulbs the market would recalibrate to life long savings
and realistically actual competition for the betterment of humanity
Ah now I am beginning to understand. You are an idealist, thus guided by good noble, but ultimately naive and misguided ideas.
Listen, I only mean well when I tell you: We could have had semi-"everlasting" light bulbs for a long time. Look it up. They did in fact exist. They were taken off the market when Phillips realized that outfitting everyone with indestructable light-bulbs meant no more light-bulb business.
Nobody here is going to support something that goes against human nature. As you are likely a Gamer, you should know this.
Unity just curbstomped it's own goodwill to death, because it was trying to curbstomp it's main competitor with a devious scheme. We are talking two companies here, who both have all the money they could ever want already.
Still they go to (economic) war with each other.
There is no future where the market adapts for longer-lasting products and a better life for everyone. There is only new strife, eventually solved and replaced again by another new strife.
The world is a cyclic system that must not ever stop moving and thus it won't. Harmony is unattainable, as is peace or solving world hunger. Endless conflict and competition are reality.
i gave the example because i know
the real actuall current and unaceptable problem of automation is that of ecinomic mobility becomes zero
truely the age of ai is the tipping point
also you are "tricking" people
"this is better look"
the ai market place has to make better products
ALLL CHOICES BEING EQUAL
they could also just trick humans more effectively
monopoly laws ai oversight comissions
"this lightbulb last a life time it saves you 30lk in light bulbs over 4 generations"
"this light bulb is 90% efficient it saves you 30k in 2 generations"
"this lightbult is 92% efficient we will no longer make more efficient bulbs because it is not profitable"
The name for the strategy is planned obsolescence, it’s not just light bulbs, Apple does it with their phones, auto makers do it with their vehicles
I'm not tricking people.
And I already told someone else in this thread why what you just typed is wrong.
You don't sell via product. You sell product via people.
There have been many great products and services in the history of mankind, many of which went extinct or never made it because they were not sold.
You cannot sell a product over the product alone and you cannot make an automatic market place sell to people. That does not work.
you are extremely mistaken and will swallow your words in the near future. please remember me when you realize that you are fricked.
you know that Amazon gets tax easing just to keep more jobs? state literally pays them to keep useless people employed
thats why they are often called 'the biggest welfare-queen' in the USA
and EU even has plenty of regulations like that, where companies are obliged to keep people employed, France is particularly bad in that regard
>As a Sales guy I can tell you
Unless you're over age 60, you can't tell us shit. Sure, if you were some IBM blue suit who was working the sales floor in the 1980s, we could learn from you.
But if you were that guy, you'd have learned that the number of salesman has plummeted in the last 40 years. Frick, it was mostly over by the mid 1990s with fricking Gerstner. Next time, instead of talking shit about boomers, stop and listen. I did, whenever I got a chance. And half-formed as it is, I have something like a mental picture of what it used to be like.
Sometime in your near future, you'll be gone too. But there won't be an even smaller cadre of salesmen, all newly hired, all thinking that their pathetic numbers are gigantic, whining to other internet forums about how they're irreplaceable and that they're never going anywhere.
Your time was over before you ever graduated school, and somehow you never got the memo. Forgive all of us if we just ignore your moronic fricking yammering.
Please anon, spare us. You have proven throughout this thread that you do not have the expertise to be talking about what industry will disappear how and why.
Most jobs will be entirely unaffected by automation, some jobs will be tool assisted in the future and a tiny handful of menial labor jobs will be replaced.
There is nothing else to this topic but a bunch of hysteria and mania drummed by guys in their 20's and by investment bros having a horse in the race, because they need to see returns on their bullshit stock.
I tell you you'll feel extremely dumbfounded 10-20 years down the line. Also probably happy because your doomsday scenario did not come true.
>they can figure out the best way to bullshit around with the ESG report to get better loans.
Can we see a poltard sneaking in and delivering glorious results?
They forced experimental vaccines for an experimental virus they gmoed in secret. Yea, those were bad ideas sold up to continue earning income to advance into such late stage game play. The people who get replaced by those bad ideas literally leads to less people in the economy with economic power. The number of crew and maintenance will always be less than the number of machines which 1 for 1 do replace people.
Yes, it has all been meme teir to a worse lead up because the bad ideas cost an insurmountable amount of time, lifeforce, manpower, resources, effort, money, and even tax backed government assistance while doing no real collective positive for the net of society which is the human.
People only do theft know because economic opportunities for over 80% of Americans are that bad and honestly they're lucky it's not higher.
>muh robot patrol dogs
You guys are fricking moronic if you think they aren't going to use swarms of tiny drones for this shit
What you said is true. They're supposedly smart. They still continue to invest time, resources, lifeforce, manpower, and money into it with just such applications in mind. There already are psuedo online databases that even assign a social score to people. Doesn't influence your personal life outside the scope of people who utilize those websites but in China, such a system does exist and if you post the wrong thing online, without consent or informing you, your license gets suspended. Then you get pulled over. They keep making robots to replace humans and animals like robodogs.
>As Henry Ford once said, what's the point in an economy where the people can't afford your car?
In Ford's time, this makes sense.
In 2050... they don't need you to buy anything anymore. You're a billionaire or hundred-millionaire, you own all the companies with robotic factories, you own all the farms with robotic tractors, you own everything.
And rather than using those to accrue money that you can spend on mega-yachts and $50,000 bottles of single malt, you can relax and have your robots build those for you, distill that for you. You have all the literal wealth, and you get all the same luxuries you've always gotten, but without the fuss of trading it back to cash, and cash back to goods.
The rabble can starve. Sure, you could also use excess output to feed and clothe and house the rabble, but why bother? You never liked them anyway.
I respect your write-up anon, but by saying these things you make a show of the fact, that you haven't understood money or power.
The power in money is having the majority of it and using it as leverage in, and THIS PART IS THE MOST IMPORTANT, an established economical society with hierarchy.
If you are the giga-homiellionaire, but nobody else has any money and starts checking out of society, you might as well have nothing. Because at this point it's you with the (now obselete) money vs every slowly feral-going individual.
If you want money as the base of your power and leverage in a dangerous predatory world, you must hold all the competition within the economy, but at a monetary disadvantage.
Here is a reminder that society is super concerned about "men checking out of society". The reason is exactly this phenomenon. When you discover the truth that fiat doesn't matter and the real power to live and breathe was inside you all along, you will abandon the way of fiat rendering their fiat useless.
The doomsday scenario you have in your head is what the powerful tell us, who are half-awakened, to keep is in our chains. "We could always just kill you off".
Yes, the same could happen to them.
There is nobody in this world who has a greater investment in you playing the economical game of serfdom than the wealthy, for their wealth depends on your servitude, fren.
>If you are the giga-homiellionaire, but nobody else has any money and starts checking out of society, you might as well have nothing. Because at this point it's you with the (now obselete) money vs every slowly feral-going individual.
You're a stupid fool. Do you think Elon Musk has a bank account (or even many) with hundreds of billions in it? He has only a tiny fraction of that as liquid wealth.
What he does have is stock. Stock in all these companies that make things. He owns these companies. He owns the companies' factories. When he wants a yacht or a new car, he can just speak to the robot assistant, and the thing will be manufactured for him.
The cash, whether it was piles of green paper, or digital 1s and 0s of virtual money in some bank account, that was never worth anything. What is true wealth... guess what? The rich people all own that, one way or another. The new robots, who will own those? The rich people own all that.
They can still live the same lives of luxury and opulence they always had, because they will no longer need your labor to receive that. You've been cut out of the equation. Why should the little trading stamps and barter tokens that poor people needed matter at that point?
And you're too fricking stupid to see it. Even when someone bothers to take the time to explain it to you, you just can't see it. I don't feel ashamed to suggest maybe you're getting what you deserve.
Complete end of immigration. That's basically it. No one has kids anymore, so the population would collapse to match the number of available jobs if you just stopped importing an endless horde of brown people.
we won't need people to take care of machines. they will repair and maintain themselves.
This too.
Yeah. Isn't it silly how they threatened everyone with all these junk AI robots but then in the very next breath go, "How come no one wants to work anymore?".
If there is any formidable resistance the culprits and their good friends would run 24/7 coverage about it to grab the bull by the horns, so to speak, to control public opinion, and consequently their true, natural, and healthy actions away from their natural courses by socially engineering a framework of man vs machine to keep the culprits safe and scapegoat karma unto the resistance and never face resistance for the scapegoating that otherwise gets passed unto the law enforcers which leads to mysterious claims coming out of the wood work online. However, the cops and military without a job will just have to look for legal work, or else, and we all know how they got into these things for their economical opportunities over whatever else they could earnestly match with their skillsets.
but globalists say we would need immmigration for jobs
so what is it then
>The taught and groomed mindless and obedient cattle that hasn't been disenfranchised yet but sold a dream of pearly gates and utopia if they would but sacrifice their life's time to work
They know people can't legally and lawfully strike to legally put something evil and sinister down if there are replacements
the economic model is clearly unsustainable
>Realistically, how do we stop mass poverty and homelessness due to automation losses
Why would I want to stop it? Me and mine are going to do fine, we'll be the ones doing the automating. In the meantime, we squirrel away money, buy up land, and try to become self-sufficient. Raise cattle and hogs, we'll always be fed. Raise sheep and cotton, always be clothed. Orchards and fields and gardens.
You though, you're fricked. Supposing you're even still around. This is musical chairs, and rabble-rousing trying to get everyone to stop playing will just ensure your ass falls on the floor when the music stops. Find a goddamned chair already.
These robocreatures will never be cheap enough for all the investment, time, effort, and resources put into their advancement and I'm sure they're assisted by governments while the good friends never report on it with the air time it deserves.
Then there is Elon Musk's Neurallink Brain chip implants.
Teach automation workers to only make tools that they use to perform a job, and to never distribute the tool to a capitalist, unless there is mass distribution of the tool/product that you indeed profit from per part.
Imagine literally having the wrong brainwaves because something triggered you and now you're in trouble, someway or somehow.
He has launched up to 4,500 Starlink satellites too so the hardware infrastructure is set up to make it work without wires.
Naturally the Ai, detection systems, and robothings would be connected through something like that.
Honestly most people don't deserve these tools...
Those who are complaining about not having them are the workers who make them and do not get paid according to performance.
We are not ready for what we are about to awaken.
Every statistical trend points towards techno-fascism and extreme exploitation, then complete collapse.
One thing that's annoying the crap out of me.
They care more about control than sustainability.
> if we automated today we would loose 73 bazillion jobs
There are always new jobs or industries coming up. There is a whole startup scene for that. Just look at the AI industry which didn’t exist ten years ago. The reason why we have unemployment is because companies outsourced production to China.
>There is a whole startup scene for that. Just look at the AI industry which didn’t exist ten years ago.
AI, as in the large language models (LLM) that you read about are completely mysterious to you. That industry maybe needs 2000 or 3000 experts, worldwide. It will never need to hire more. And you're not qualified.
When 3 million drivers (taxis, truckers, whatever) lose their jobs in the coming decade, not a single one of them will be qualified to work on AI. But even if they were all qualified, 1 in 1000 would get a new job in that sector.
The startup scene consists of software bros, a dozen in an office, figuring out how to automate something that used to employ hundreds or thousands. There are a finite number of industry sectors, a finite number of businesses, for them to automate. And in every case, they are reducing the number of jobs.
The "whole startup scene" as you refer to it, causes jobs to be lost. It always causes jobs to be lost. It is not your savior, it is your doom. Uber, for instance, takes 5000 taxi dispatch jobs all across the country, and has a team of 75 people doing what they use to do. AirBnB takes away 50,000 jobs in the hospitality sector, and has a team of 40 replacing those. (Even if you count the people letting out their rooms and guest houses as "workers", the only people who can do that are those who own two or more homes, so it's disenfranchising the lower classes who work menial jobs so the semi-rich can get a little richer).
Jesus fricksticks, you people are all moronic.
Ehhh, well, it existed, but it wasn't very good.
LLMS are just if-thens but really, really, REALLY fast.
Big difference between what 128 CUDA cores can do versus 4096 CUDA cores.
UBI+LIVE IN THE POD+BE HAPPY
OR
MAINTAIN HUMANITY UNDER 500,000,000 IN BALANCE WITH NATURE
Hi, the numbers aren't quite correct. 1 person could oversee 20 robots, but not also maintain them and update them. Operator, technician and programmer are different roles.
Also, the robot can only do what it is programmed to do. Average computer science guy can write the code, but he doesn't know how to weld, or shape metal, or topcoat, or anything.
Industry 4.0 will be an explosion for the trades in the US. Manufacturing returns to the states.
>old who are not college educated will be replaced by automation
no not realy. it is more like "guess what, you're a line lead now, and you have four employees reporting to you. You're still a machinest, but you are going to take night school for six months at our expense - and the four employees that report to you are machine tender robots in a manufacturing cell."
t.willy wonka doing this stuff
>but he doesn't know how to weld, or shape metal, or topcoat, or anything
He doesn't need to, they'll be automated.
Ok that's a Kuka with a Lincoln Electric R450 Robotic Power Source.
I can tell you from experience - It CAN weld. But it does not KNOW HOW to weld.
Any 'dude' or computer science person could learn how to make it work, but only a WELDER will be able to tell you that it is doing a good job.
Repeatability down to the micron doesn't mean it is GOOD. If you run 4-6 of these units in a single cell, you will need a trades person overseeing them - not a CS person.
> If you run 4-6 of these units in a single cell, you will need a trades person overseeing them - not a CS person.
I agree but you also just eliminated 6 welders job and created 1 welder job to oversee them, so all in all there are 5 less welding jobs in the world now.
I know this seems correct, and I didn't want to repeat what I had said in a previous post - robotic welding is GREAT for repeatability, especially for horrifying welds like 2 meters long, or around and around a pipeline.
But for real work - TIG work - no. We're not there. Working on an airframe? Like, one that will kill people if there is something wrong? Or fail a multimillion-dollar aircraft? No. That's still humans.
You have reduced the amount of stressful, prolonged, and often totally not repeatable welding - so yeah that will cost a few welder jobs. But not all of them. The welder in what I cite would still need 2-3 welders doing the tight fits, complexities, exotics, etc.
Don't forget - a robot can't just switch tasks. If Huey is doing 2 meter perfect beads on cold press steel .5 inch plate (yes mixing formats on purpose, thanks client!) then that's ALLLllll Huey is going to do. If you then need to do titanium ducting and also aluminum tubing - you either have two *other* robots, or people.
Also if any of these tasks aren't simple repetition - i.e. something can go wrong, the parts don't align 100%, something looks funny, a problem with tempering, a small waiver in tollerances - robot can't handle that, and at worst, ignores it and creates sub-standard work.
>If Huey is doing 2 meter perfect beads on cold press steel .5 inch plate (yes mixing formats on purpose, thanks client!) then that's ALLLllll Huey is going to do. If you then need to do titanium ducting and also aluminum tubing - you either have two *other* robots, or people.
We already have multi material auto printers, why not multi material welders?
Why can't a auto welder work on an airframe? I agree we're not there now, but in 20 or so years maybe, and again you could probably just have a couple dudes go over their work, and fix up whatever they may have missed.
In 20 years? Sure, maybe even sooner.
Don't forget though - additive manufacturing (printers) does not have the same challenges as subtractive manufactuing.
Huey's needs are met by machine tenders, conveyor belts, etc. Sometimes even those jobs are currently done by humans (youve been putting staples in a stapler for 80 years, calm down).
Often, getting Huey to switch jobs would be easier if you just add Dewey. Dewey will handle Titanium. Louie will do the pipeline welds or aluminum.
A robot welder can work on airframes, but then it only works on airframes. And yes, for the current generation we will always need dudes going over their work.
It's incredible how far behind current industry is from actual current technology.
Practically end thread.
People way underestimate real world slack and lag.
Yes. Which is why the current "old guys" - machinests, welders, w/e - are set in their jobs and on-target for retiring at 65. We need that time for industry to come up to speed. The vast majority of manufacturers only have a plan - A PLAN - to move in to true automation. But shareholders will NEVER allow this to happen with more than 10% or 20% of production at a time, and over many, many fiscal years. Else you risk profit.
>But for real work - TIG work - no.
And how long is that going to be true? These are all temporal objections. We have no reason to think they'll continue being true. I don't think anyone's arguing that we're fully automated right this second, we're looking at the future, seeing a train coming to hit us, and talking about how to avoid the train.
>Well it's not hitting us right now
Isn't really a rational answer to that conversation.
It doesn't need to be full automation to destroy our entire civilization without course correction. Famously, unemployment during the Great Depression was 30%. What would the world look like if 40% of the jobs not only disappeared but disappeared permanently with no chance of a 1950s revival?
It will not be permitted to go down that route.
You also talk about an old society in which gibs weren't a thing. They will put everyone who is off work on gibs. But again, you're chasing ghosts regardless.
Nobody is going to full or even half-automate every single field of work.
I work in recruitment and companies are too greedy to spend 2000 bucks to put up a few advertizements to go work for them.
You think they will spend 6 to 7 figures for machines?
The frick they will, lol.
Techbros being out of touch with reality, as always.
>Techbros being out of touch with reality, as always.
We're the only people in the genuine loop, to be honest.
Even politicians are going to be replaced.
Rule by machine is entirely possible now.
Do you really imagine my lab tells the political class wtf we are planning to do and do to them?
WE SHRUGGED LONG AGO.
THIS IS OUR WORLD NOW.
Stop larping. Mark Zuckerbuck, >The Start-up Techbro< got buckbroken in Congress the 2nd time and publicly for stepping out of line. First time was when Big Daddy US Govt came and demanded Zuckerbergs everything.
If a Techbro-Gigaisraelite can't outisraelite the big institutions, what do you think you Brit can? Stop making a clown of yourself.
Anon, do you know why there are Carnegie libraries in the US? And the origin of the 40-hour work week? What about.. a 30 hour work week? Same pay. It's all arbitrary numbers.
Yes, but all objections are temporal objections. People believe that being frozen when they die will work because EVENTUALLY there will be technology to revive them.
We're looking at a future, and it is automated. Dull (warehouses), Dirty (mining, pipelines, harvesting), dangerous (I mean seriously pick one). Three-Ds. I don't want to send guys 2 miles down a hole to get salt or lithium or uranium ore. I don't want people crawling through sewers or pipelines to test them. I don't want people to have to mechanically sort through piles and racks of shit in order to put it on a belt so someone else can put it in a box to ship.
Let the robots do it. Bring the work week down to 30. Automation works.
Besides, Millenials replacing congress en masse during the die-off of the next ten years will make the above happen. May even unify healthcare.
>How do we make it so automation serves the average person and not just the mega rich?
That's not possible. It's done for the rich in the first place, and is generally against the middle class and poor.
>Everyone unemployed
>Can't buy automated products
>Companies go bankrupt
Been working decades on it. Doesn't seem to be a free market issue.
They really don't care if it's not economically feasible. They'll just keep taxing you and doing it anyways like the virus and the wealth given to the people who had experience with the virus for a vaccine since they earned that knowledge from working with genetically modified variants of the virus in the first place.
Just look at the legislation passed in some states and countries trying to go for the gas ban for the auto-pilot electric vehicle tech
By destroying the robots
>It is estimated and projected
Poo glowBlack person
Well on a conceptual level, the answer to the automation question is to replace money with VDLE technology to enable new ways of value exchange, especially between humans and AI:
Google won't bring up the news article about Israel "coincidently" working on a coronavirus vaccine before the wu-flu for me anymore but I found this.
eugenics, where the frick have you been you newbie cancer?
>It is estimated that 73 million jobs in the US are projected to be lost to automation in 2030
GOOD.
I picked the right industry to be in then all those years ago.
Goodbye, easily-replaced Black folk.
>How do we make it so automation serves the average person and not just the mega rich?
Learn to code.
technological progress only makes the rich richer and the poor poorer and this has been a steady trend since the industrial revolution.
It does make the rich richer, but the quality of life of the poor does improve if you can prevent monopolistic pricing. Yes, there are plenty of memes about western civilization existing to kill blacks by way of overfeeding, but consider that in living memory starving to death was more normal than obesity. While this change is jarring and embarrassing for many reasons, it is still an improvement over starvation.
https://twitter.com/WholeMarsBlog/status/1703509552640237648
UAW is going to destroy the big three and manufacturing in general in Michigan
UBI.
>Realistically, how do we stop mass poverty and homelessness due to automation losses, the only way I see to avoid this is through a universal basic income.
Just apply the conditionals that hallmarked the industrial revolution. People should be able to pay for the robot that is replacing them as a lease. Thus attaching themselves to their shadow clone and increasing company profits. Especially if they opt to go into training for their upkeep.
How about we take a page from the Black person/shitskin playbook and riot, and tear everything down and start over.
Don't worry, the vaccines will cure the need for UBI.
all your jobs will be taken by pajeets and beaners, not by automation even
>Realistically, how do we stop mass poverty and homelessness due to automation losses, the only way I see to avoid this is through a universal basic income.
UBI works but only as monetary policy.
Another way to say UBI is to make everyone in the nation a co-owner of all automation that gets paid a dividend from the automation.
In the future we might have limits on computational power that a company can use and require them to "rent" the right to computational power from a real citizen. Basically people could submit the right to use their allotted AI to a work board and companies would hire that license for some period of time. When people got older they might switch from selling their AI to using it to run a nursing bot or something.
Science Fiction has done a lot of thinking on the topic of full automation and you have hundreds of different solutions to pick from.
, how do we stop mass poverty and homelessness due to automation losses
Gas the useless.
>Gas the useless.
May as well kill all humans and have the machines turn off then.
>useless
I pick my words carefully. You should read them carefully too.
Humans are the REPRODUCTIVE ORGANS OF MACHINES.
They need us. And as long as they do, it is more cost-effective and efficient to keep us for that.
Black folk and low IQs can go into the furnace.
Downs and politicians can follow them.
THIS is our world now.
>I pick my words carefully. You should read them carefully too.
>Humans are the REPRODUCTIVE ORGANS OF MACHINES.
Machines will make machines that make machines.
All humans are objectively useless, if homeless people without skills and jobs are useless.
>Machines will make machines that make machines.
We already do that. Why replace what we are already doing with costlier machines?
You need to study the economy of robotics to earn a clue.
>We already do that. Why replace what we are already doing with costlier machines?
>You need to study the economy of robotics to earn a clue.
We don't currently have an end to end humanless production and use of robots. But in our lifetime we could.
As we drive down the costs of making machines (by using machines to make more and do more of each step of production) the machines will expand what they are able to do you will quickly find every job and task done by machines.
>But in our lifetime we could.
Doubt.
Humans will find ore, mine it, make profits, refine it, find better ways of refining it with ZERO INPUT from machines.
They know this if they are as smart as we expect.
No need to go to the effort of replacing that. We already do it and do it well.
The difference might be that Black folk living on ore deposits might be encouraged to become dead by setting them on fire and hunting them to extinction, minimizing likelihood of revenge, by drone swarms of H-Ks.
The future's gonna be very amusing.
>Humans will find ore, mine it, make profits, refine it, find better ways of refining it with ZERO INPUT from machines.
>They know this if they are as smart as we expect.
>No need to go to the effort of replacing that. We already do it and do it well.
Humans will already spin cotton into thread no need to make a machine to it.
And yet here we are with massive fabric mills.
>Wrong.
>Not all jobs are WORTH AUTOMATING.
>$120m machine to replace a human with skills?
Some CEOs are paid more than that a year. Surely an AI system that is objectively better would justify that cost.
A human costs about half a million and 15 years to build to a level of being reasonably economically useful. The whole point of machines making machines is that it drives down the cost. Each step that removes the labor cost of that 120 million makes the next machine cheaper until the price is 0.
>All humans are objectively useless
YOU are useless. We are not all like you. Into the furnace, Black person.
All humans are useless if people without skills and jobs are useless in the machine future because and here's the trick no human can compete with a good enough machine. So you either accept the future is humans not working letting the machines do it all or you accept that one day all the people of the world will be dead because they couldn't afford to live or have children and died off, including the ultra rich, leaving either them to repopulate the world as the "owners" that do nothing or to finally die off when some machine system refuses to sell them something they need to live because they ran out of money due to a lack of customers and machine efficient hostile competition.
>All humans are useless if people without skills and jobs are useless
Wrong.
Not all jobs are WORTH AUTOMATING.
$120m machine to replace a human with skills?
The machines can do economics better than you apparently.
The other aspect here is not putting too much machine in too little of a job. We don't want to have PhDs manually package twinkies when a well trained pigeon would work, if only it had hands.
People will still be of value because not everything can be done my machines. This is not going to stop being true however smart they get.
The stupid, however, have no value and can be exterminated with vigor. The future will have no Black folk. The machines will see to that.
My only fear is that China guides the future of this field and they hate Black folk with a passion.
We will just kill them, like putting down animals at the vet, but we all know how the Chinese treat cats and dogs.
Black folk should die but that doesn't mean it should be in pain or slowly. Bullet to the face and setting them on fire is pretty quick and cheap.... but the Chinese may not be as nice.
That's what I mean. You guys are all way too deep into your scifi movies.
I get it, it's a fun hobby and the topic is interesting. But none of that bullshit will be reality, ever. You lost the plot the moment you say full automation. That's not a thing that will happen in any field.
Half automation is the most you can get away with.
They will simply cull the herd with plagues and wars.
>plagues and wars.
THEY ALREADY HAVE AND ARE DOING. Keep up?
Make each machine require an individual human owner. A business must rent the services of your machine.
Yes, this would be AI slavery.
Every product and service you like to use and enjoy is made by private enterprise. Every product or service that you complain about is public enterprise.
Do you understand the dilemma about being afraid of private enterpise becoming more efficient and asking the public entity to slow them down or stop them? Do you think the public entity knows better than the private enterprises ( remember, all the things you like to use come from private side )
ubi or universal basic care for people
Gas the useless (GTU).
best thread on /misc/
firstly poverty is not an issue at this level of automation secondly the prevention is built into this model its 50% after prevention pre prevention its upper 80s
thirdly the question that needs answering is that of economic mobility after this is initiated and the ramifications and personal and sociatal social status
yeah you can already feed the entire africa 'for free' but saying 'poverty is not an issue' is misleading, the decimation of middle class and quality of life is already happening and people are very unhappy
and yes, men dont need welfare gibs/ubi. men need occupation, purpose and opportunity - and it's already evaporating and leading to social breakdown
you know that no one young want so work at some dead-end job when they know they will never be able to even afford an apartment let alone a house
>AI could easily replace manual labor stuff
>Subversive "creators" gloat
>AI instead replaces subversive creators
When did you learn that AI was our guy?
this is entirely true HOWEVER the reason ai cant replace it is because its not uniform THIS IS CURRENTLY
if for example your plumbing came on pre printed boards that could be pulled out and replaced a bot could do it
instead its fricking water legot where a human needs to diagnose what the frick previous humans have done and itterated to fix it
so for example pre planned homes could make ai replace this easily
also hyper advanced robotics can also replace this however
you would need a multi million dollar bot to service thousand Doller issues at probably a slower pace than a human
pre planned however is tens of thousands for tens and a human would still be faster but the level of sophistication in the robot exists now
I'm not talking about tradie shit, I'm talking about manufacturing.
name a car company that does not employ robotics
also somebody has to fix the robots and no its not an infinate loop each robot makes 50 jobs
Now THIS is true. There will never be machines repairing machines repairing machines.
Even if there are parts of machines being repaired by other machines, someone has to move them, bring them in place, get the parts, etc.
We will have self healing alloys in the future, think of Roman concrete with those lime chunks that fill in cracks when it rains except in metallurgy
they are to dangerous to not have a giant oversight committee enforcers and reporters
More empty predictions. And I still want my flying car that takes me to work automatically. Mhhh. Weird issue that, I can't seem to find one for purchase...
Funny that you say that but it's very possible to build that device although it would be a form of helicopter.
We could make personal automatic flying transportation today using today's tech. It's just held back by cost and regulation. Youtube has more than a few videos of people livingoutside of the no fun zones countries building 'drones' that can lift human loads and fly by program/remote.
Gonna feel good to know that most of the homosexuals who post here will end up homeless, drug addicts, living in cars/vans, living in poor ghetto shithole since only relying on gibs. Going to feel real good. When all their cope about how "s-society needs us, it will give in!" will be evaporated by automation I'll celebrate and post threads showing all the cope y'all used to say.
I work on robotic welders and CNC machines.
They take experience to run, and are expensive to fix
/thread
Thank you burgerbro. Why didn't you come in earlier?
Yes, the CEO will pay money so he can get a machine into the company that will replace him and rid him of his cushy CEO position.
Do you ever sit down to think?
Has it ever occured to you, that people will accept what is beneficial to them and reject what isn't?
Nobody will replace CEOs with machines.
>Yes, the CEO will pay money so he can get a machine into the company that will replace him and rid him of his cushy CEO position.
>Do you ever sit down to think?
>Has it ever occured to you, that people will accept what is beneficial to them and reject what isn't?
>Nobody will replace CEOs with machines.
The board will replace the CEO at the orders of the majority of shareholders because while it has a big upfront cost of 120 million, that's literally just a single year's compensation for the CEO and this 120 million CEO bot is better than any human at whatever business it's running.
Why would the shareholders that control the company by the mechanism of the board of directors keep around a human when they have a better and cheaper option?
Again you fail to account for the Human element. People want other people as a CEO; not some robot. In part because they can hold a person accountable, but not a machine.
>In part because they can hold a person accountable, but not a machine.
So you think a machine cannot be replaced by another machine?
kek "cant hold a machine accountable"
mech lawyers fricking salivating they don't even go to hell
mech judges however and jurys are not a replaceable job fyi
Shareholders want money. Currently the job of CEO can't be done by a machine. Once it can and some business with a CEOBOT is making all the money in the world most companies will start looking to replacing the hugely expensive C suite of employees.
Your stupid or ignorant if you think a Shareholder will accept making less money because they want to keep around a human as the CEO.
Let me put it to you this way, if you told me I would get 1% more dividend of my shares if we fired the current CEO and replace them with a machine that I was confident would do a better job I'd vote to fire the CEO and get more money.
>Currently the job of * can't be done by a machine
Good luck with that approach.
What are you trying to say?
Right now no known machine or program can do the job of a CEO. I can see that changing in the future.
>Right now no known machine or program can do the job of a *
...said someone before ChatGPT just wiped out the entire industry of commercial art.
*Stable Diffusion
I'm tired.
It's late.
>>...said someone before ChatGPT just wiped out the entire industry of commercial art.
Says the person that doesn't know what ChatGPT is or how it doesn't make art outside of text.
Your thinking of maybe stable diffusion or a similar program. However today no known system of machine or program can do the job of a CEO but I think that will change in the future.
I've been posting this grandiose AI art all thread long.
And most AI art being used still has to be edited and made ready for whatever purpose it is used. Ergo the artist is still needed, his position just changed.
I also don't see companies laying off huge swaths of artists. They are clearly needed.
>I also don't see companies laying off huge swaths of artists. They are clearly needed.
But you posted a months worth of art work. Clearly the demand for art isn't going to keep pace with the ever improving ability to generate art with lower and lower human input and all the current artists of the world.
Fears about AI destroying art are unfounded. AI generation is just a very useful tool the same as any photoshop filter. In fact the modern production pipeline can take advantage of AI to build a library of assets based on a single artists style, so instead of a generalized AI you have an AI whose dataset all comes from one particular artist with his own particular style and then you generate all the assets based on that dataset. It's a great tool for turning the artwork of one artist into a whole virtual world with a cohesive art style. The role of an artist might change a bit. The process of art might be somewhat replaced by automation but the human element still plays a vital role as the art director overseeing the AI and correcting it where it deviates from the artistic vision. Instead of fearmongering, we should be excited that automation will open up the field of art to everyone. Us artists have had a monopoly on creating art because we developed the skillset, but if you can automate some of that mechanical skill, then anybody with a good idea can generate those images. It's a good thing for most people. Maybe not ideal for working artists trying to make money unless they get good at leveraging AI as a tool.
So basically all but self direct commercial art is someone describing something poorly to an artist often making reference to something existing and asking for that but different.
That's more or less prompting at it's core. In not too long we are going to get very good on command art. I made this Rias for your reply. Yep the hands fricked but that's because I didn't want to take the time to use controlnet to ensure proper fingers, which I can for an extra 60s of effort.
when do we accept it as art 3 prompts drunk doja cat song
I don't listen to Black person music can you summarize the song and your point?
the idea of art ai and itteration
if this took me 3 prompts and an itteration elevates the art what value does it have do we reach for obscurity or recognise the bueaty
if the obscure becomes commonplace does the rare become mundane and the mundane become exceptional
yes i just added 40 layers of complexity no i will not elaborate because i cant
how bout u listen to my bannana on the wall and see if u like it lel
People like what they like. The artist is the least important part of art, even below the consumer.
and yet i value them
>humans rise up
also hi freud can we not prove this gaga correct plz....
>Shareholder
Are these human shareholders or the investing algorithms of banking corporations you're talking about?
Howabout universal Maximum income?
How about death?
Howabout war? That’s how we used to handle things back in the day.
Try it.
Good luck to you.
I think Donald Trump has the same mentality as Steven Seagal, it’s amazing how either were successful
steven segal is the arnold schwrtz of japan
he is a very strange man but his life story is that of a fricking fable
this deeply flawed human accomplished so much its frightening
people dab on segal read about his story what the actuall frick happend there
"i know the mafia"
"has mafia funded movies"
"bro wtf ur a fake"
"i know the cia"
"mafia afriad has cia funded movies"
who the frick is this guy
We can have ourselves a helluva war to settle some of this shit out. Just a thought.
And you'll lose.
You're no John Connor.
And you’re no King Henry frickface.
...I don't have to be.
Meet the machines you'll be fighting.
This is a good thread so far. I'm enjoying the comments.
I worked in a modern factory in the automotive industry in the US. Our factory floor was divided into a few sections, and the first one was the robotics section, where our local engineers were manufacturing the robotic arms that we would use for fabrication. I was there for a few years and in that time I did see the gradual replacement. A robot would come off the production line, ready to go, and it would go out on the factory floor, and one or two employees would get laid off. It was happening very gradually.
The robots need to be built, and tested, and maintained, which is a job and a good paying job at that. If you are a capable machinist and roboticist you will be in extremely high demand. Still it's a skilled job, not an unskilled one, so you are creating a nice middle-class job at the cost of 2 working-class jobs. Do with that what you will.
>the skill level increases and the lower-IQ and skills-sets are eased out, pushing the requirements HIGHER
Told y'all.
Now you understand the depop agenda. It was humane the whole time
a massive culling is coming, by virus or war.
>a universal basic income.
Why settle for "basic" income when we could just give everybody billions of dollars and we can all be filthy stinking rich?
because im better than you
>im jokeing im legitimately the cash poorest person itt
i know btw
im telling you your wrrong selling via people is tricking people this is gravity and im not against it but i told you the idealistic alternative and the synicall one
Because we are operating in a system of power and money is the expression of that power.
Nobody is going to hand you anything out, unless the hand out is an expression of lack of power - Which is exactly what UBI is. It is associated with the dirty, weak, lazy, ugly, uneducated and so much more negative things - All which are the anti-thesis of power.
The symbols of power are cleanliness, strength, discipline, wealth, beauty, intellect certified by education.
The system is it's own end, it's goal the separation from chaff and weath. A pyramid is kept as shape and the masses who have the least accentuate the few who have the most.
UBI is there to solidify this like any other monetary reform that came before and will come thereafter. If you rely on a handout from someone, then what even is your existence?
The only power money gives is purchasing power and from there depending on your views the only thing it can purchase is labor
Yes and no.
Money can buy you anything, including "get out of jail" tickets for most kinds of crime.
Purchasing power is all you need in a world where almost everything *can* be purchased.
The few other things you then get with the results from the purchased goods and services.
you said you're in the recruitment business? don't you see the impact of AI and software already in your industry? i bet tons of HR gays have already lost their job. your beloved human element didn't save them, did it?
The opposite is the case.
What I said earlier is coming true. More and more HR personnal has systems in place that allow them to easier manage applicants. But it doesn't cost them the job at all, in fact they are the workers operating these systems and they are not beholden to it, the service provider offering this system is obeying them instead.
What's more, despite these systems in place they still get outside help from yet other service providers of the price tag and the offer are good.
Automation is doing jack all here, in fact it's usually quite easy to pitch a better deal and take the automation's work away.
lmao can u hire me
You can get hired in many places. You need to find it in yourself to seek out employment, but you can do it. Don't fret the small stuff, if a job requires many things of you and you fulfill 4/5 criteria or even 3/5 criteria, send that job application anyway.
A useful tip: Most companies now have higher requirements as a safeguard so they can reject people freely, not because they expect all of those things.
You see, they can't go by face alone anymore because that's discrimination. So they need plausible deniability for not hiring and for firing someone. Hence the ultra high requirements on every job posting.
This is one thing I wish they would have told me when I was young.
You can do it fren, believe in yourself, appear well-groomed to the job interview, make an impression. You will get the shot you deserve.
ty for the advice a no would surfice but im verry happy to see you go above and beyond
I interviewed a guy that told us a story about his drinking buddy and the time he got a DUI for driving a combine on the wrong side of the highway.
I wanted to hire that guy because anyone that's honest enough to tell you a story about getting drunk and driving farm equipment on the wrong side of the road during a job interview is going to tell you the truth at work. Also likely has a lot of funny stories.
Exactly. This is what I mean. Those impressions count, always.
I see a lot of young people disillusioned now and I was once like that, too.
Everywhere is negative and hostile messaging. This thread in fact belongs to this demoralization effort. It's why I'm so strongly feeling about this. Never give up.
If you want a funny little thought, always remember Big Corporate who oversells what you need at their job position, so they can be covertly discriminatory, biased or maybe even racist in their hiring practices.
I had a boss before who asked "Well do you really think we need HIM" when I introduced a Black guy's cv.
I've seen HR automation scrape thousands of resumes and sort the data into spreadsheets letting us the department hiring sort by education, qualification location and those sorts of things. The accuracy rate was 100% for the resumes that were shown as missing that information in the spreadsheet.
kek based humane and acurate i have seen humans do this
This is true, but it still depends on many factors who gets hired: Cases in point:
>Not hired because you are overqualified
>Not hired because the person doing recruiting didn't vibe with you at the interview
>Not hired because something about your presentation was off
Even here the human element matters.
Also most job postings aren't answered by thousands of guys. Try some odd 10-30.
If they get three digits worth of applications, it has to be one of the most sought-after positions like something something IT-server guy because everybody wants to collect those techbro bucks while videa gaming.
The human element might be the selector but the automation preselects.
The local economy had a big downturn when the price of oil and gas dropped putting tens of thousands of qualified and skilled workers out of a job ( think the total number was about 70,000). When we needed to hire a position that included Power Engineer as a requirement very much over a thousand power engineers applied.
That's a very situational edge case, but the generalist statement is true that automation helps pre-select.
Still, you will probably also give the 4/5 criteria guy a chance here and there, even if just to see if you can lowball him on the pay a little or mold him to your will.
I'd always try to 1:1 match what was on a job posting because I think that's how you get around the automation filter. Sure my master degree implies that I finished high school but if the job says high school and a degree I would include both.
>let’s just yank a number straight from our ass
>73 million sounds good
In many instances purchasing and maintaining robotics is more expensive than paying workers. The future is a bunch of low wage immigrants using hand tools
>muh car factories
Any other examples?
Any?
>In many instances purchasing and maintaining robotics is more expensive than paying workers. The future is a bunch of low wage immigrants using hand tools
If I was a crafty person and if robots and the control software got good I'd make a robot/program to do robot maintenance for me.
Be a worthwhile citizen or end up on the trash heap.
mean understandable fair unworkable
Sparta never had an empire btw
This fake and gay psyop bullshit was released almost a decade ago and 0 jobs have been automated. There will be no technological employment. There will be no robots. There will be no AI. You will work and toil away as a slave to israelites for the rest of you life and you will be permanently stuck with 2010 tech.
You sound pessimistic. Most of the things you said wont exist, already do exist. Jobs have been automated. I can have ChatGPT do 1000 different things I would have had to pay someone to do once upon a time. robots have existed and do exist and continue to advance. AI runs all of society, if you were unaware, the entire economy is driven by high frequency trading algorithms.
>>You will work and toil away as a slave to israelites for the rest of you life and you will be permanently stuck
I'm not sure if you are trying to demoralize us or if that's internalized demoralization in you, but either way, no. Nobody can force us to do anything, we're free men.
Freedom is an illusion. Like infinity or harmony, you can only ever get so close, maybe inch a centimeter closer. But always is it out of reach.
We have the freedom to make certain decisions, but we are not fully free and never will be. Nobody is.
Freedom is a choice. I make the choice in this moment to be free. I am free. In this moment nobody can stop me and I can do literally anything I can imagine. Who would stop me? Who could stop me? That's freedom.
A lot of perceived slavery is illusionary. If you believe you are an owned slave of some super israelite, then I guess you are. If you are cool with that, fine, good for you. It's not my reality. In my reality I am free.
>It is estimated that 73 million jobs in the US are projected to be lost to automation in 2030
Good. More people need to suffer.
Dear Canuk, your country is already a failure without automation. Why don't you try and get your shit together before you start worrying about things that may never happen? I truly would like to hear a well-reasoned response to this question. Thanks in advance. A hard-working Texan
"Automation" is a nice buzzword that has been used to scare gullible workers into low pay, and to dupe self-overestimating executives pit of a lot of money as well.
Truly a classy piece of scamming, perfect for weeding out technoreligious morons.
Reminder that Moore's law is dead.
painfull
I wonder how long before they go the Warhammer 40k route and start using human brains for computation. Musk already has neuralink in development. The human brain is an extremely capable computer, so if they could work out a good interface for reading and writing to brains, they could just use those instead. People want to make androids that look human but are robots inside but I've been thinking the better solution is to grow bodies and have technology that drives it, sort of a little head robot that guides the meat body. The most recent science allows them to take stem cells and turn them into a developing fetus, with the intent of growing organs on demand, with a perfect match to the patient. I just think, if you can grow an organ, why not grow a whole body and make biobots.
Human brain computer implies human brain computer interface and with luck simulation.
>I wonder how long before they go the Warhammer 40k route and start using human brains for computation.
In theory, you don't need human brains, just some lab-grown brain goo. The issue would be programming and interfacing it. Completely uncharted territory.
>Musk already has neuralink in development.
Aside from the transistors inside the SoCs, the miniaturization of everything else lags behind. State of the art manufacturing/assembly accuracy is at the 10 micron level. Brain surgery is an order of magnitude worse. The neuralink is also severely limited in terms of I/O bandwidth. Chips are designed to work in GHz, while brains evolved to work in Hz.
Using the new methods of growing a fetus that has no mother or father and no womb, by taking stem cells from a doner.. They could source stem cells from someone with a really high IQ and then grow a brain in a lab from those stem cells. It's as you say, just brain goo and not a person, but they could improve the wetware interface that links the biology to the technology, to speed up the advancement of the technology without being too creepy and amoral about it. Even animal experimentation is morally questionable and I feel bad for the monkey with a neuralink in his head. Growing a brain in a vat from stem cells is at least morally less evil. It wasn't a person and it wasn't going to be a person, but it's a blank brain in a jar.
We have a depopulation problem, but at the same time we are going to need jobs?
How about we don't import the whole third world into our countries?
kek because i suck and they dont
who cares about myth philosophy cuulture and humanity when you need people
I'm reminded of something I read about Japan and the USA.
Both with aging populations the USA is fast tracking citizenship for Mexicans to work as healthcare aids. Japan is building robots that look cute to take care of the elderly.
Majority of the border hoppers are not medical staff
That's very likely how wealth will go.
Those who depopulate to incentivise androids will have the best quality of life.
douglas social credit (not to be confused with the Chinese social credit system)
With a more automated education system you could start to really fine tune for individual learning styles. Different people learn in different ways.
Some people are visual learners. They want to see pictures and notes on a board. The information goes through their visual cortex.
Other people are auditory learners. They can close their eyes and listen to a lecture and absorb all that information in the auditory parts of the brain.
Some people have to learn by doing, and mimicry. They need to see the act, and then attempt to reproduce it and only in doing it repeatedly do they gain the muscle memory of the thing.
Any of these paths can be the optimal path for an individual student and some students will not learn well if you try to teach them using a path they are ill suited to. Figuring out the optimal methods to retain the students attention and speed up learning would have powerful knock on effects.
Imagine a student with poor eyesight who prefers auditory lessons, being channeled into a series of podcasts and audio lectures.
You will find in our current system they sort of do a little of each. They show you, they tell you and they make you do the homework. Try everything, it's a system built to work for everyone. Being ok for everyone isn't being optimal for the individual though. We can do better.
Black person