[Unregistered User 8]

I saw a small time filler in between 2 scheduled programs on TV yesterday where a company is very close to having a viable " driverless " truck system which can be retrofitted to existing vehicles. The developers of this technology were saying that the United States turn over in trucking is USD $168 BILLION, and of this, USD $70 BILLION is wages. ( Their figures.) The system they were saying will cost 10's of thousands per unit, which probably translates to a years wages for a human driver. My question is, if this technology, and similar things being developed for other industries, is adopted on a seriously large scale, which of us is going to a) have a job to go to, and b) have any money other than welfare payments to buy all the things being made and delivered around the country by machines? The social upheaval of automation is becoming a massive problem IMO. Your thoughts please.

[MJSfoto1956]

Machine Learning is the next big thing in the software industry. All the parts are now aligned. And it is happening as we speak. In 20 years most jobs will be able to be done by robots that are not "programmed" as they are today but rather ones that "learn" by watching and doing. This will include things like cooking the perfect omelet -- even correcting for things that can go wrong in the kitchen (e.g. a bad egg). We as a society will need to have a conversation about what role government will have in such a world. If we allow it to be "every man for himself" then war and great strife is inevitable. However, if we come up with something more equitable, then perhaps we can avoid this scenario. But kicking the can down the road will only make things worse. Sadly, some relish the prospect of endless strife as their world view is morbidly negative.

M

[automorphism]

I'm not worried about automation. In fact, I see it as a good thing. It will allow us to consume more and work less. For some people consuming more will just mean more work they like. For example, my job is research (in a field not that distant from artificial intelligence actually), and I would still do that even if I were filthy rich. But there are many aspects of my job that would be improved with robots, such as administrative tasks.

As time goes on we are only getting richer with less work, on average, and that's great.

In the short run, some people might lose their jobs and even be worse off, but over longer periods of time, people will have new things to do, and as resources increase because of efficiency, there will be so many resources that they can be given away - c.f. the basic income experiments that have been tried - they are only the beginning.

[Tas]

I'm not worried about automation. In fact, I see it as a good thing. It will allow us to consume more and work less. For some people consuming more will just mean more work they like. For example, my job is research (in a field not that distant from artificial intelligence actually), and I would still do that even if I were filthy rich. But there are many aspects of my job that would be improved with robots, such as administrative tasks.

As time goes on we are only getting richer with less work, on average, and that's great.

In the short run, some people might lose their jobs and even be worse off, but over longer periods of time, people will have new things to do, and as resources increase because of efficiency, there will be so many resources that they can be given away - c.f. the basic income experiments that have been tried - they are only the beginning.

Yes, the great Utopian ideal has been covered, probably best by Gene Rodenberry, as in his ideal future ‘filthy rich’ is not relevant when you don't need money.

Intelligent automation for driving and hazardous work will undoubtedly be more efficient and safer thus reducing costs on health care and impact on the environment, all whilst reducing running costs. The positives are going to be many if it is implemented right.

But there's also the reality of the job losses that you've touched on in a manner that could be interpreted as glib, though I don't believe that was your intent. I mention that because unlike employed you I am one of the 'lucky' ones tapped on the shoulder earlier this year to be told I'm redundant. It's not an enjoyable experience, and finding work is not easy; there's thousands of people who’ve been made redundant in the last couple of years and we all compete for the jobs that come up. I have a mortgage but won’t be able to sustain it on what I currently have coming in.

Therefore the context for me and many others is knowing that many more jobs will disappear completely is not a comforting thought. 'It will all work out in the end' is no doubt the mantra that will be espoused and yes the worst is likely to be a transitory thing, but many in our societies have not really grasped what these types of revolutionary changes will mean, any more than workers did in the Victorian era during the Industrial Revolution. Maybe this one can be called the AI (or IA for Intelligent Automation) Revolution? It would be appropriate as the changes will need to cater for a significant proportion of the global population being under-employed or unemployed. Maybe forever?

So we’re going to have many more needing income support yet the social welfare budgets of western governments are always under pressure as they are now. Let’s add some more context; there are specific demographics in a country's population that fare worse than others, and the issues relevant to them need to be resolved before we start adding to the burden of automating a large portion of working taxpayers into redundancy. In this aspect consider the strain on aged care (and the increased load it will experience in the coming decades) or embarrassingly, the ongoing plight of our own indigenous people. Of course, these are but two of many.

I find it interesting you propose the idea of additional resources being given away which is contrary to the human norm of self-first. Businesses are about making money, shareholders the same. You've proposed a very philanthropic ideology coming from these same people who by and large are about profits whilst reducing their tax burden, not adding to it. These are the same types of people who made me redundant to reduce costs. The Execs then meet their KPI’s and get their bonus. TFB for me and the fifty or so others who were caught up in the quaintly titled ‘restructure’.

Of course no stereotyping, the rich are not all the same, however you’ve raised what amounts to changing basic human behaviours in order to achieve the desired outcome. Not an impossibility I guess, but a big mountain and an interesting challenge. To be cynical for a minute, ‘we’ can’t stop the harm to innocent civilians in Syria let alone the millions murdered in Africa by people wanting to be rich and powerful. Nationalistic fervour is at a global high and the last two times it seemed to be like this was the start of and the middle of the Twentieth Century. I hope I’m wrong with that though there's nothing like a good war to speed up the pace of technology.

The OP has asked a huge question that needs to be put into the context of how we’re failing now, and what the new changes will mean. Some of the learning tech will hopefully resolve the disparity between the third world and the first world, though let’s be honest; there’s plenty of homeless and disadvantaged in our societies already. But you mentioned there's been some work on preparing for the future and I would really like to learn more about the ‘basic income experiments that have been tried’? Do you have any links to info or peer reviewed reports on it?

It is much healthier and more useful to focus on the positives in automation but no amount of feeling positive will make up for whole swathes of human employment being made irrelevant. Did mass unemployment in certain states influence the recent US elections with an outcome not foreseen by many? Can anarchy ensue if large parts of a country’s population become ineffectual and unemployable? Maybe Soylent Green will be the solution? Possibly, but let’s ask a different question: If Intelligent Automatons can replace humans in many jobs now (or soon) why can't they eventually replace them in all jobs and if they can, what is the point of the human race?

[arnold]

There will always be work to be done. Roofs need leaks fixed, taps that drip, decks that need repair, gardens that need weeding, trimming and pruning. Sometimes it is quicker to do things by hand than set up automation. In any case, even automatic machines need human intervention. Your automatic K1 will not fix itself. Certainly some jobs become redundant, we don't need to shovel coal into steam engines on ships and locomotives, or pay navigators on airplanes, but new work shows up to replace it. A job is not something we own, but simply an agreement to supply another party a service or article he needs. Those needs will never end, and neither will the associated jobs. It appears true that the minimum level of training will have to rise above what it has been simply by the nature of technological work. Our schools will need to get back to basics and forget the focus on social engineering..

[Unregistered User 8]

I am one of the 'lucky' ones tapped on the shoulder earlier this year to be told I'm redundant. It's not an enjoyable experience, and finding work is not easy; there's thousands of people who’ve been made redundant in the last couple of years and we all compete for the jobs that come up. I have a mortgage but won’t be able to sustain it on what I currently have coming in. Therefore the context for me and many others is knowing that many more jobs will disappear completely is not a comforting thought.

Hi Tas. Sorry to hear that you are going through a tough time mate. You understand my question 1st hand. Good luck to you, and I sincerely hope things take a turn for the better in 2017. Take care buddy, and stay positive.

[wibbly]

technology has been making people obsolete for centuries. whats different now?

[Unregistered User 8]

technology has been making people obsolete for centuries. whats different now?

The scale of it. In just the American economy alone, there are millions of vehicle drivers.( Trucks, taxis, delivery vans etc ) What will they do when they can no longer work. What meaningful employment will they be able to do? What jobs can we create by the millions to take the place of what they do now. I am in the sheetmetal industry which is being decimated in Australia by work being taken offshore. We as a nation are making very little now. We based our economy around mining, and for a couple of decades that seemed to work. Now the price of our exports have fallen dramatically and we are paying a huge social cost now.

[wibbly]

so farm equipment and manufacturing technologies didn't replace millions of jobs?

[Unregistered User 8]

They did. There was a social cost then, and there is one now. How many jobs have ATM's taken out of the banking industry? Self serve check-outs in supermarkets now displacing 1000's of people. If all menial work is going to be done by machines, what are the people who can only do, or only want to do that type of work supposed to do to support themselves. I know history, I am asking about the future.

[MarkJerling]

I have a number of Popular Mechanics magazines (with "a number" read a huge stack) dating from the 1930's through 1950's. Every so often, that magazine ran an article about all the wonderful technological advancements being made and all the great things that were going to change our lives in the future.

And here's the thing: Every one of those "predictions" were wrong. The thing is: We can only predict the future based upon our understanding of current technology. We cannot conceive of things not yet invented.What is interesting is that this new technology will change our lives, but often not in the way we intend or in the ways we can comprehend right now.

One thing is for sure - We live in interesting times.

[PJ1]

But there's also the reality of the job losses

Hi Tas
Sorry to hear things are not the best. Having a bit of a battle myself at the moment, trying to stop a 5000 head feedlot going in less than a kilometre from our house and fledgling tourism business. I get my day in court on Friday so hopefully that will be resolved. But what I wanted to say was give us a yell if I can help - even just a few days in the bush to take your mind off things.
Peter

[Unregistered User 8]

I get my day in court on Friday so hopefully that will be resolved.

Good luck to you too Pete. Hope all goes well mate.

[wildman]

"Are humans becoming redundant??"

We always have been - the universe doesn't give a damn about the presence or absence of the human species one way or the other.

[Unregistered User 8]

"Are humans becoming redundant??"

We always have been - the universe doesn't give a damn about about the presence or absence of the human species one way or the other.

I don't believe that, but if you do wildman, you might need to change your signature.


" There is no wealth but life " John Ruskin