It is currently Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:15 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 621 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 26  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:10 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 2:48 am
Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Has thanked: 525 times
Been thanked: 141 times
flybynight wrote:
In the report, researchers at the Facebook Artificial Intelligence Research lab describe using machine learning to train their “dialog agents” to negotiate. (And it turns out bots are actually quite good at dealmaking.) At one point, the researchers write, they had to tweak one of their models because otherwise the bot-to-bot conversation “led to divergence from human language as the agents developed their own language for negotiating.” They had to use what’s called a fixed supervised model instead.


https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/06/artificial-intelligence-develops-its-own-non-human-language/530436/


Folks, I've said it before & I will keep on sayin' it: THIS ROBOT/AI SHIT IS NOT RIGHT!!!

I have a feeling that the bots in question were not told to come up with their own langauge. They did it on their own.

This is not going to end well. I ain't going to the extermination camps. :twisted:

_________________
Matthew Paul Malloy
Veteran: USAR, USA, IAANG.

Dragon Savers!
Golden Dragons!
Tropic Lightning!
Duty! Honor! Country!


Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on TumblrShare on Google+
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 10:01 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 12:30 am
Posts: 1623
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 366 times
MPMalloy wrote:
flybynight wrote:
In the report, researchers at the Facebook Artificial Intelligence Research lab describe using machine learning to train their “dialog agents” to negotiate. (And it turns out bots are actually quite good at dealmaking.) At one point, the researchers write, they had to tweak one of their models because otherwise the bot-to-bot conversation “led to divergence from human language as the agents developed their own language for negotiating.” They had to use what’s called a fixed supervised model instead.


https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/06/artificial-intelligence-develops-its-own-non-human-language/530436/


Folks, I've said it before & I will keep on sayin' it: THIS ROBOT/AI SHIT IS NOT RIGHT!!!

I have a feeling that the bots in question were not told to come up with their own langauge. They did it on their own.

This is not going to end well. I ain't going to the extermination camps. :twisted:


Don't worry :D It won't be so bad Just get in line behind Jeeper and Stercutus and enter your order on the touch screen. The AI will add the special sauce to your Wendys double

_________________
As of now I bet you got me wrong


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:05 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 2:48 am
Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Has thanked: 525 times
Been thanked: 141 times
flybynight wrote:
MPMalloy wrote:
flybynight wrote:
In the report, researchers at the Facebook Artificial Intelligence Research lab describe using machine learning to train their “dialog agents” to negotiate. (And it turns out bots are actually quite good at dealmaking.) At one point, the researchers write, they had to tweak one of their models because otherwise the bot-to-bot conversation “led to divergence from human language as the agents developed their own language for negotiating.” They had to use what’s called a fixed supervised model instead.


https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/06/artificial-intelligence-develops-its-own-non-human-language/530436/


Folks, I've said it before & I will keep on sayin' it: THIS ROBOT/AI SHIT IS NOT RIGHT!!!

I have a feeling that the bots in question were not told to come up with their own langauge. They did it on their own.

This is not going to end well. I ain't going to the extermination camps. :twisted:


Don't worry :D It won't be so bad Just get in line behind Jeeper and Stercutus and enter your order on the touch screen. The AI will add the special sauce to your Wendys double

See a robot, smash a robot. Fuck an AI. :rofl:

_________________
Matthew Paul Malloy
Veteran: USAR, USA, IAANG.

Dragon Savers!
Golden Dragons!
Tropic Lightning!
Duty! Honor! Country!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:28 pm 
Online
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 2:53 pm
Posts: 8142
Location: PNW
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 154 times
Removed serious post from joke thread.

_________________
In my day, we didn't have virtual reality.
If a one-eyed razorback barbarian warrior was chasing you with an ax, you just had to hope you could outrun him.
-
Preps buy us time. Time to learn how and time to remember how. Time to figure out what is a want, what is a need.


Last edited by ZombieGranny on Mon Jul 10, 2017 9:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:54 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 12:30 am
Posts: 1623
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 366 times
ZombieGranny wrote:
How are you going PAY for it all?
That seems to be the question from the OP.

You have no job.
Your spouse has no job.
Your kids have no job.
Your parents have no job.

Where are you going to get the money?



" How to sell your body parts for fun and profit !!" by NHTP

_________________
As of now I bet you got me wrong


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 10:29 am 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 2:49 am
Posts: 1713
Location: Yo Momma's House
Has thanked: 268 times
Been thanked: 235 times
flybynight wrote:

Don't worry :D It won't be so bad Just get in line behind Jeeper and Stercutus and enter your order on the touch screen. The AI will add the special sauce to your Wendys double


In the area of my hometown we have Sheetz, it's like a gas station restaurant extravaganza (like Wawa or fancy 7-11)... and they've been using touch screens since they started their restaurant section... at least as long as I can remember (about 10-15 years). It works great. Oh, and they pay their employees starting at like $9.50 which is 2 bucks more than minimum wage. And it's easy for workers to get to over $11 an hour.

Not great pay, but better than mcdonalds. And the food is good. So I'm not 100% against automation in food.

But yeah, gimme some of dat robot sauce

_________________
They see me trollin', they hatin'.... keyboardin' tryna catch me typin' dirty
Halfapint wrote:
There are some exceptions like myself and jeepercreeper.... but we are the forum asshats. We protect our positions with gusto
zero11010 wrote:
The girlfriend is a good shot with a 10/22.
Her secondary offense will be nagging.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 3:47 pm 
Offline
* * * *
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 3:48 pm
Posts: 818
Location: Northern California
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 53 times
ZombieGranny wrote:
How are you going PAY for it all?
That seems to be the question from the OP.

You have no job.
Your spouse has no job.
Your kids have no job.
Your parents have no job.

Where are you going to get the money?


Exactly. Technological change can drive economic and social change.

If robots and automated systems are doing all the work, then our whole understanding of work-for-pay, pay-for-needs/wants breaks down. It can break down in a good way where it is replaced by something better, or in a bad way where it and all the people depending on that system just become obsolete and basically just have to scrape, scavenge and steal until they eventually just die off.

People will want and need a way to achieve their goals in life without becoming idle wards of the state. They will want/need some kind of productive endeavor in which to apply themselves, something that people can do better than robots. Or that only people can do... a list which will become smaller and smaller.

I heard about a silicon valley experiment applied to Wall Street transactions which involved cryptocurrency and open-source concepts that, because of the way it was structured, promoted win-win transactions over winner vs loser. It was ultimately an over-all more successful model. If we can move in that direction economically, there may be hope for the automated future paradise the sci-fi writers of the 1950's envisioned. If not, we may be in for a dystopic eventuality where people become at first replaceable, then disposable, then a resource-consuming nuisance to be dispensed with.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 4:13 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Posts: 11336
Has thanked: 69 times
Been thanked: 572 times
Quote:
People will want and need a way to achieve their goals in life without becoming idle wards of the state. They will want/need some kind of productive endeavor in which to apply themselves, something that people can do better than robots. Or that only people can do... a list which will become smaller and smaller.


Why do I keep getting the feeling that most posting in this thread lack imagination?

Let's see....

- Are there more or less robots and automation than there was 200 years ago? 100 years ago? 50? 25?
+ That would be more, more, more, more

- Are there more or less occupations, job fields and opportunities than there were 200 years ago 100? 50? 25?
+ More, more, more, more

The dumb task of unskilled labor is going away and has always been replaced by something cheaper, better and faster. As society becomes more complex, more complex jobs are created.


I get it. Change is scary. That does not make it a bad thing.

_________________
"Big Thanks - I promise to advance your agenda within the secret and omnipotent councils of the Trilateral Commission"

“No-one likes us, we don’t care.”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 4:55 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 2:48 am
Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Has thanked: 525 times
Been thanked: 141 times
Neville wrote:
ZombieGranny wrote:
How are you going PAY for it all?
That seems to be the question from the OP.

You have no job.
Your spouse has no job.
Your kids have no job.
Your parents have no job.

Where are you going to get the money?


Exactly. Technological change can drive economic and social change.

If robots and automated systems are doing all the work, then our whole understanding of work-for-pay, pay-for-needs/wants breaks down. It can break down in a good way where it is replaced by something better, or in a bad way where it and all the people depending on that system just become obsolete and basically just have to scrape, scavenge and steal until they eventually just die off.

People will want and need a way to achieve their goals in life without becoming idle wards of the state. They will want/need some kind of productive endeavor in which to apply themselves, something that people can do better than robots. Or that only people can do... a list which will become smaller and smaller.

I heard about a silicon valley experiment applied to Wall Street transactions which involved cryptocurrency and open-source concepts that, because of the way it was structured, promoted win-win transactions over winner vs loser. It was ultimately an over-all more successful model. If we can move in that direction economically, there may be hope for the automated future paradise the sci-fi writers of the 1950's envisioned. If not, we may be in for a dystopic eventuality where people become at first replaceable, then disposable, then a resource-consuming nuisance to be dispensed with.
Good post Neville. I am not holding my breath for the former & I am prepping for the latter. I think that there was a movie not too far back starring Matt Damon, in which the storyline was similar to what you posted, IIRC.

_________________
Matthew Paul Malloy
Veteran: USAR, USA, IAANG.

Dragon Savers!
Golden Dragons!
Tropic Lightning!
Duty! Honor! Country!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:45 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 12:30 am
Posts: 1623
Has thanked: 236 times
Been thanked: 366 times
Stercutus wrote:
Quote:
People will want and need a way to achieve their goals in life without becoming idle wards of the state. They will want/need some kind of productive endeavor in which to apply themselves, something that people can do better than robots. Or that only people can do... a list which will become smaller and smaller.


Why do I keep getting the feeling that most posting in this thread lack imagination?

Let's see....

- Are there more or less robots and automation than there was 200 years ago? 100 years ago? 50? 25?
+ That would be more, more, more, more

- Are there more or less occupations, job fields and opportunities than there were 200 years ago 100? 50? 25?
+ More, more, more, more

The dumb task of unskilled labor is going away and has always been replaced by something cheaper, better and faster. As society becomes more complex, more complex jobs are created.


I get it. Change is scary. That does not make it a bad thing.


Thanks You make me feel so much better
Image

_________________
As of now I bet you got me wrong


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:54 pm 
Online
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 2:53 pm
Posts: 8142
Location: PNW
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 154 times
Not everyone is suited for "more complex jobs".
That gets forgotten sometimes.
Not everyone wants a "career" either, to pour all their money, heart & soul into.
Some like to do a job to get money to take home. The place that holds what they DO care about.

_________________
In my day, we didn't have virtual reality.
If a one-eyed razorback barbarian warrior was chasing you with an ax, you just had to hope you could outrun him.
-
Preps buy us time. Time to learn how and time to remember how. Time to figure out what is a want, what is a need.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 7:36 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 3:45 pm
Posts: 2107
Has thanked: 1057 times
Been thanked: 288 times
I believe it was Carl Marx who argued the downfall of capitalism would come from the owners of capital driving wages down to nothing, which would lead to customers with no money, and that would drive the system into the ground. If I have the wrong person or misunderstood the idea, somebody correct me.

With this idea in mind, I suspect those involved in automation know that automating to such a degree that all/most all jobs are lost will kill the world economy. If there are no customers, all that capital is idle and wasted.

In my adult experience, which is limited to the Midwest, I feel everyone who wants a job has a job. There are the mentally disabled who seem to struggle. There are also the "disabled," who are a mixed bag of truly disabled and fakers. One of the fakers gave me very detailed instructions on how to create a "disability" and was insulted that I would not choose that lifestyle with him. He also works a job for cash, so it does not get reported and affect his check.

I really don't see automation taking over everything. We would need enough material components to replace at least 50% of the world population, plus create the manufacturing capacity to generate those components and then develop an entire infrastructure to service and power all those robots and software programs. I honestly don't see that happening, but I do see lower skill workers having more challenges.

Coming back to my reference to Marx, what happened to prevent the collapse of the Capitalist System? Well, Unions did help curb some of the worst abuses, but the demand for consumer goods created more jobs while people shifted from being rural farmers to urban industrial workers. Then we saw an increased demand for technological workers and each human does more work than previously possible. A few farmers can farm 3000 acres, while the same number might have only been able to handle 70-100 acres 120 years ago. Though, due to health concerns and issues, there is a movement towards organic crops and coops, and this type of farming is far more human labor intensive and apparently pays well enough to attract workers.

I think we will not see the elimination of human workers. We will see shifts in what jobs humans typically do. Whether that is "dystopian" or not remains to be seen. Also, we already don't employ all available people in America. We only employ a portion. But in my experience we are currently employing almost all who are willing to work.

Something to be considered: I'm not sure we can expect the current standard of living in the US to continue. This is because of the high levels of debt. In essence, we live as though we have more money than we really do because we borrow from different sources. This is true at both the government level as well as the individual level. So we should expect a decrease in the standard of living. This decrease may not be the result of automation, but instead the result of reckless borrowing catching up with us.

Just my $1.50

_________________
*Remember: I'm just a guy on the internet :)
*Don't go to stupid places with stupid people & do stupid things.
*Be courteous. Look normal. Be in bed by 10'clock.

“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” -Bilbo Baggins.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 7:53 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Posts: 11336
Has thanked: 69 times
Been thanked: 572 times
Quote:
I believe it was Carl Marx who argued the downfall of capitalism would come from the owners of capital driving wages down to nothing, which would lead to customers with no money, and that would drive the system into the ground. If I have the wrong person or misunderstood the idea, somebody correct me.


Maybe Karl Marx? And no his ideas on labor are presented here:

http://www.economictheories.org/2008/12 ... wages.html

Pretty basic economic principals.

Quote:
I think we will not see the elimination of human workers. We will see shifts in what jobs humans typically do. Whether that is "dystopian" or not remains to be seen. Also, we already don't employ all available people in America. We only employ a portion. But in my experience we are currently employing almost all who are willing to work.


Probably. 5% unemployment is considered full employment. We don't track the maybe 12,000,000 additional workers in the country illegally. Without them there would be a huge labor shortage, necessitating high inflation.



ZombieGranny wrote:
Not everyone is suited for "more complex jobs".
That gets forgotten sometimes.
Not everyone wants a "career" either, to pour all their money, heart & soul into.
Some like to do a job to get money to take home. The place that holds what they DO care about.


But who is stopping you? If you just want a minimum wage job just pick up a newspaper and go get one. If you want to be paid well you should have no expectation of doing simple normal tasks.

_________________
"Big Thanks - I promise to advance your agenda within the secret and omnipotent councils of the Trilateral Commission"

“No-one likes us, we don’t care.”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 8:27 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 3:45 pm
Posts: 2107
Has thanked: 1057 times
Been thanked: 288 times
Yes. Karl Marx. Thanks. I can't spell to save my life.

And here is a quote from the wikipedia page:

Quote:
But according to Marx, capitalism, like slave society and feudalism, also has critical failings—inner contradictions which will lead to its downfall. Capital accumulation over time leads to increased inequality. Additionally, since capital demands a return, it also leads to increased returns coming from those without capital --- the working class. Over time the number of work hours which the working class labors 'for itself' decreases in order to provide returns for an ever increasing pile of capital controlled by the capitalist class. Following Marx's labor theory of value, this can be seen in how increasing labor productivity in the past 30 years in the United States has been accompanied by stagnant wage growth. In 2016 average labor productivity in the U.S. was $70.00 an hour while the average minimum wage was around $10.00 an hour meaning that capital absorbed 6/7ths of the value produced by the average minimum wage laborer. This creates social instability.

The working class, to which the capitalist class gave birth in order to produce commodities and profits, is the "grave digger" of capitalism. The worker is not paid the full value of what he or she produces. The rest is surplus value—the capitalist's profit, which Marx calls the "unpaid labour of the working class." The capitalists are forced by technological advances and partially by competition to drive down the wages of the working class to increase their profits, and this creates a more direct conflict between these classes, and gives rise to the development of class consciousness in the working class. The working class, through trade union and other struggles, becomes conscious of itself as an exploited class.

In Marx's view, the struggles of the working class against the attacks of the capitalist class lead the working class to establish its own collective control over production—the basis of socialist society. Marx believed that capitalism always leads to monopolies and leads the people to poverty; yet the fewer the restrictions on the free market, (e.g. from the state and trade unions) the sooner it finds itself in crisis.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_history

I might have mixed in some bits from my own, or somebody else, or maybe the Wiki page does not have the full description of what he said. I don't remember any more. It's been 10+ years.

_________________
*Remember: I'm just a guy on the internet :)
*Don't go to stupid places with stupid people & do stupid things.
*Be courteous. Look normal. Be in bed by 10'clock.

“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” -Bilbo Baggins.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 9:46 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 2:25 am
Posts: 3799
Location: Jackson, KY
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 55 times
woodsghost wrote:
I think we will not see the elimination of human workers. We will see shifts in what jobs humans typically do. Whether that is "dystopian" or not remains to be seen. Also, we already don't employ all available people in America. We only employ a portion. But in my experience we are currently employing almost all who are willing to work.



It's been my experience in my area that the demand for work far outstrips the supply. It's led to an exodus of the highly skilled and educated from this region in search of jobs that pay more than basic minimum wage. The demand for jobs is so high that wages have bottomed out, and workers are scared to death about being fired and replaced. The #1 employer in the region used to be the coal industry, but tens of thousands lost their jobs. I guess they are just lazy and don't want to work, though. It's not like I've had family neighbors who had to sell ancestral homes just to have groceries in the cupboard or anything.

Cram your damn generalizations up your ass.

_________________
vyadmirer wrote:
Call me the paranoid type, but remember I'm on a post apocalyptic website prepared for zombies.

Fleet #: ZS 0180

Browncoat

Imma Fudd, and proud of it.

ZS Wiki


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 10:25 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Posts: 11336
Has thanked: 69 times
Been thanked: 572 times
woodsghost wrote:
Yes. Karl Marx. Thanks. I can't spell to save my life.

And here is a quote from the wikipedia page:

Quote:
But according to Marx, capitalism, like slave society and feudalism, also has critical failings—inner contradictions which will lead to its downfall. Capital accumulation over time leads to increased inequality. Additionally, since capital demands a return, it also leads to increased returns coming from those without capital --- the working class. Over time the number of work hours which the working class labors 'for itself' decreases in order to provide returns for an ever increasing pile of capital controlled by the capitalist class. Following Marx's labor theory of value, this can be seen in how increasing labor productivity in the past 30 years in the United States has been accompanied by stagnant wage growth. In 2016 average labor productivity in the U.S. was $70.00 an hour while the average minimum wage was around $10.00 an hour meaning that capital absorbed 6/7ths of the value produced by the average minimum wage laborer. This creates social instability.

The working class, to which the capitalist class gave birth in order to produce commodities and profits, is the "grave digger" of capitalism. The worker is not paid the full value of what he or she produces. The rest is surplus value—the capitalist's profit, which Marx calls the "unpaid labour of the working class." The capitalists are forced by technological advances and partially by competition to drive down the wages of the working class to increase their profits, and this creates a more direct conflict between these classes, and gives rise to the development of class consciousness in the working class. The working class, through trade union and other struggles, becomes conscious of itself as an exploited class.

In Marx's view, the struggles of the working class against the attacks of the capitalist class lead the working class to establish its own collective control over production—the basis of socialist society. Marx believed that capitalism always leads to monopolies and leads the people to poverty; yet the fewer the restrictions on the free market, (e.g. from the state and trade unions) the sooner it finds itself in crisis.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_history

I might have mixed in some bits from my own, or somebody else, or maybe the Wiki page does not have the full description of what he said. I don't remember any more. It's been 10+ years.


Economic theory drifting in to politics. I'll just say the Wikipedia page makes a couple crucial errors in their assumptions, mostly in an attempt to score political points.

_________________
"Big Thanks - I promise to advance your agenda within the secret and omnipotent councils of the Trilateral Commission"

“No-one likes us, we don’t care.”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:56 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 8:11 pm
Posts: 1433
Location: Western Slope, CO
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 233 times
DarkAxel wrote:
Cram your damn generalizations up your ass.



Pump the brakes there superchief, he specifically limited he generalizations to his area, and is obviously talking about the long view.

I live in a major boom/bust town dependent on the extraction industry. Sure there are periodic upheavals, but people find other jobs or move, and the unemployment rate always seems to return to its equilibrium. Town I lived in before that was a major company town for a different industry, felt like half the town got laid off when they downsized. Some people took longer then others, but everybody found new jobs or moved.
Might be different where you are at, but from the areas I've lived his generalization holds more true then not. There might be plenty of areas where this isn't the case, but I haven't spent much time there. Might be a generational difference as well, you talk about people having to move to find jobs; my cohort accepts this as a matter of course. Want a job? No good ones around? Move. Sounds like people are doing just that, enough of them move and equilibrium is found again.

_________________
share your tobacco and your kindling, but never your sauna or your woman.

AK, Glock, Pie.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:11 am 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 2:48 am
Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Has thanked: 525 times
Been thanked: 141 times
RonnyRonin wrote:
DarkAxel wrote:
Cram your damn generalizations up your ass.



Pump the brakes there superchief, he specifically limited he generalizations to his area, and is obviously talking about the long view.

I live in a major boom/bust town dependent on the extraction industry. Sure there are periodic upheavals, but people find other jobs or move, and the unemployment rate always seems to return to its equilibrium. Town I lived in before that was a major company town for a different industry, felt like half the town got laid off when they downsized. Some people took longer then others, but everybody found new jobs or moved.
Might be different where you are at, but from the areas I've lived his generalization holds more true then not. There might be plenty of areas where this isn't the case, but I haven't spent much time there. Might be a generational difference as well, you talk about people having to move to find jobs; my cohort accepts this as a matter of course. Want a job? No good ones around? Move. Sounds like people are doing just that, enough of them move and equilibrium is found again.

I agree. There will be upheaval of varying degrees, but eventually, all markets reach equilibrium.

_________________
Matthew Paul Malloy
Veteran: USAR, USA, IAANG.

Dragon Savers!
Golden Dragons!
Tropic Lightning!
Duty! Honor! Country!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:45 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Posts: 11336
Has thanked: 69 times
Been thanked: 572 times
Besides which the coal industry issues have nothing to do with robots, especially if they are closing mines.

_________________
"Big Thanks - I promise to advance your agenda within the secret and omnipotent councils of the Trilateral Commission"

“No-one likes us, we don’t care.”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 1:05 am 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 2:48 am
Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Has thanked: 525 times
Been thanked: 141 times
All robots are mechanical pieces of shit.

_________________
Matthew Paul Malloy
Veteran: USAR, USA, IAANG.

Dragon Savers!
Golden Dragons!
Tropic Lightning!
Duty! Honor! Country!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:55 am 
Offline
* * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:07 pm
Posts: 512
Location: North Carolina
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 40 times
A few more food-for-thought videos about why an AI revolution is probably different than the past technological revolutions - in that it will be more directly competing with humans in their core ability to do any kind of work or thought, potentially more efficiently than any human, effectively making humans 'unemployable' for no fault of their own except vast practical inferiority.




Again, generalized AI which is capable of a wide variety of tasks, has a 'concept of reality', and develops motivations for how it would like to shape that reality (general goals, rather than domain-specific goals), and/or has human-like 'curiosity' ("What is matter? I want to study what it's made of.") is still probably a good ways off. 20+ years? Who knows. But AI which is superior to humans in very narrow domains is starting to crop up in nearly every kind of industry, activity, science, art, etc. It would be a tremendous feat to tie those all together, with a few critical 'magic' steps in between right now, but you can start to imagine something that is more capable in every way than a human as an ultimate eventuality, and whatever that thing/species(?) is, being our successors in the galaxy.

_________________
Rahul Telang wrote:
If you don’t have a plan in place, you will find different ways to screw it up

Colin Wilson wrote:
There’s no point in kicking a dead horse. If the horse is up and ready and you give it a slap on the bum, it will take off. But if it’s dead, even if you slap it, it’s not going anywhere.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:41 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 10:08 am
Posts: 2593
Location: Coastal SC
Has thanked: 268 times
Been thanked: 312 times
These are my opinions, take them as you will...

As increases in automation of work force practices continues, every physical task is up for reinvention or replacement. First among these are repetitive and hazardous tasks. These will decrease the cost for manufacturing industries in several ways. 1) A $100,000 robot works practically 24/7 (yes there is downtime for preventative maintenance and fixes so stop nitpicking ) and is more cost effective even if replaced every year. 2) Health Insurance cost and worker's compensation in the event of an injury (you fix a robot) which can run into the $100,000s of dollars depending on the injury and "/gulp" lawsuit. 3) Process efficiency as a robot repeats the tasks exactly the same each time without fail (or it needs to be repaired so it does).

So are they 20 years away? Nope, just right around the corner. We have seen automated food preparation systems, factory welding robots, and even a brick layer ( http://www.archdaily.com/779906/new-con ... an-workers ). Fixing stuff will still remain a more human task until AI gets up to speed.

As these forms of physical and hazardous labor get replaced, new forms of work become available. Mainly, robot repair and maintenance. Now, do the displaced labor types have the necessary skill sets for these new jobs? Most likely not. So another group comes in to fix the robots, which immediately causes animosity from the displaced workers against them for just doing their jobs as they are "stealing their jobs".

The cycle repeats itself with each new "revolution", unless the displaced workers adapt to the new environment and skills needed, they will continue to be replaced.

My 2 cents.

By the way, is the 's' or 'c' silent in the word 'scent'?

_________________
jnathan wrote:
Since we lost some posts due to some database work I'll just put this here for posterity.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 10:32 am 
Offline
* * * *
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 3:48 pm
Posts: 818
Location: Northern California
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 53 times
Stercutus wrote:
Quote:
People will want and need a way to achieve their goals in life without becoming idle wards of the state. They will want/need some kind of productive endeavor in which to apply themselves, something that people can do better than robots. Or that only people can do... a list which will become smaller and smaller.


Why do I keep getting the feeling that most posting in this thread lack imagination?

Let's see....

- Are there more or less robots and automation than there was 200 years ago? 100 years ago? 50? 25?
+ That would be more, more, more, more

- Are there more or less occupations, job fields and opportunities than there were 200 years ago 100? 50? 25?
+ More, more, more, more

The dumb task of unskilled labor is going away and has always been replaced by something cheaper, better and faster. As society becomes more complex, more complex jobs are created.


I get it. Change is scary. That does not make it a bad thing.



I don't think there's a "lack of imagination". But I think maybe you are not thinking it all the way through.

Wheelbarrows get invented, allowing one man to carry the same load as two guys with buckets. So one of the guys who used to work carrying buckets all day, goes and gets another equally unskilled job... whatever that is can ride for the moment. Maybe he works in a wheelbarrow factory, putting tires on wheelbarrows... not substantially more complex than the guy who is pushing the wheelbarrow.

Now if we assume that in the very near future, robots or automated systems are going to be doing most of the truly menial jobs, that means that all the people who were doing those unskilled jobs need to upgrade to more complex occupations... not everyone is capable of doing that due to their innate capacity, but let's let that ride for the moment... So the person trains for a few months or years, and is now capable of holding a somewhat more skilled occupation, assuming there are actually openings hiring... they just increased the competition for those jobs. Five years down the line, the computers/robots have gotten better and are doing most if not all of the entry-level skilled jobs.... so those workers again have to elevate their skill level... how many months or years does that take? And how long before the pace of change increases to where jobs are becoming obsolete in less time than it takes to train to fill them? This is where the machinery's true hole card gets played... with flash memory and ability to copy from one unit to the next, training takes next to zero time or investment. Just download the new skill, boom, can you start work now Mr Robot? Oh, Mr. Wetware, we're sorry, we really can't afford to send you to hazmat training for a few weeks, but that's ok because we have an applicant already filling the position...

This labor pool forms a huge pyramid with the largest number of workers doing the least skilled jobs. The level above them has more complex jobs, and there are fewer people employed at that level. The next level up, same deal, more complexity, fewer workers. Finally you get into top tier workers who typically have very narrow specialties like Rocket Surgery that very few people have the ability to master at a professional level. Every time you wipe out one tier of jobs (complexity level wise) you SUBSTANTIALLY increase the competition for the next level up jobs.

And yes, you are correct, there are more different kinds of jobs today than there were way back when. When you reflect on it though, those jobs, though they are diverse in nature, are not significantly different in innate complexity. You can program a robot to serve french fries with about the same amount of software/hardware as it requires to push a wheelbarrow. Maybe less, even. The thing you will notice though is that mechanization and automation have reduced the number of jobs in the lowest complexity levels. It's a trend I would expect to see continue as automation and robotics expands it's capabilities in coming years.

If a computer can understand vocal questions, and come back with meaningful/correct answers fast enough to beat the best Jeapordy players on earth, it doesn't matter much how much hardware and software they threw at it to make that happen... it's a matter of time for it to become smaller, faster, cheaper and more sophisticated. Within 10-15-20 years you're going to have systems that drive people to work, clean house, read books to toddlers, hell, WRITE books FOR toddlers, and compose songs as good as half the stuff on the radio today.

And when you have systems that are good enough to handle the mental and physical requirements of the jobs that is presently occupied by the lower half of the current work force, there aren't going to be enough "new jobs" springing up with the same level of complexity those people were capable of handling.... because the factory that makes those robots is just going to program them a little differently for each job at the same level of complexity the robot is suited for. No weeks, months or years of training... you copy over the operating system and program instructions onto the freshly built chassis, bing, another unit ready to start working, sir!

The jobs that will be safest the longest are the most challenging and skilled. Which only a very small percentage of the population is suited for. You can't take a guy who was pumping gas one week and train him to be a corporate law attorney or a brain surgeon in a few weeks,months, maybe never. If you could, there wouldn't be enough surgeries to keep most of the brain surgeons employed.

You are right, there are different jobs now than there were in the middle ages, but people and their ability to handle tasks of varying degrees of complexity largely haven't changed in any fundamental way.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:09 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 3:45 pm
Posts: 2107
Has thanked: 1057 times
Been thanked: 288 times
DarkAxel wrote:
Cram your damn generalizations up your ass.


I deeply sympathize with the issues you and tens of thousands of others are experiencing. I did not vote for that. And I really don't know how much my sympathy is worth coming from about 1400 miles away across the internet.

I also know my ancestors left their homes and shitty situations and came to America. I don't think they regretted their decisions.

Like Ronny, I have grown up with the idea that we must move. I have also seen both my parents unemployed at the same time, at age 55 and 53. My dad eventually got his own business up and running after looking for jobs for several years. He is doing well. My mom went back to school for a year, met the new licencing requirements, and now is back to work. So my life has shown me that stuff happens, even later in life, and we need to be ready to adapt and change. That was a pretty scary time for my parents. The same has happened to some of their friends as well.

It left a mark on me too, and I live my life with a strong awareness that the carpet can be yanked out from under me at any time.

Stercutus wrote:
Economic theory drifting in to politics. I'll just say the Wikipedia page makes a couple crucial errors in their assumptions, mostly in an attempt to score political points.


Well, I won't argue any of it is historically accurate. I agree there is some effort to score points. But we all need to be aware of the different ideas out there, and it is in that context that I presented the quote and page. Also, I was admitting I got some details wrong.

Neville wrote:
You are right, there are different jobs now than there were in the middle ages, but people and their ability to handle tasks of varying degrees of complexity largely haven't changed in any fundamental way.


I disagree. I think people of the middle ages would be stunned by how complex our world is. But I think we have had the luxury of relatively gradual changes in complexity. I do think the pace of change is accelerating. So far humans have kept up with changes, but that might not always be the case. The human brain is pretty impressive though.

_________________
*Remember: I'm just a guy on the internet :)
*Don't go to stupid places with stupid people & do stupid things.
*Be courteous. Look normal. Be in bed by 10'clock.

“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” -Bilbo Baggins.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 621 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 ... 26  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Mad Mike and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group