Smart robots will take over a third of jobs by 2025, Gartner says

[TeaPot&ChopSticks]

Smart robots will take over a third of jobs by 2025, Gartner says

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/smart-robots-will-take-third-jobs-2025-gartner-says/

I fear that this kondratiev wave will be a very bad winter for ordinary young people - especially Generation Y or millennials.

Peak Debt - Peak Jobs - Peak Civilization ?

Please excuse my rant.

Or have I read too much fear porn - especially from zero hedge, peak prosperity, taki magazine, infowars

What are we to become unless eaters and be culled to the Georgia Guide Stones 500 million.

What are serious thinkers on this forum ponder about this problem.

I cannot believe that all these jobs will be replaced. The intelligence bell curve has a big middle and lower end, what the hell are we all going to do?

Go on the dole? Nope. Peak Debt.

How the hell will people live? Go back and be Elboan Farmers like the Dilbert Comic?

I despise those machines at Supermarkets and always use a person. I can believe other people would chose convenience over somebody else having a job.

At this rate I not do want to buy a house and save - but how the hell can one save and leave money in the bank when inflation just eats it away.

It is not like I have access to insider trading like the political and banking class.

And honestly how the hell can twitter be listed on the Stock Exchange? What does it even produce?

It is obvious to me that the immigration crisis in North America is being set up to merge Mexico and the United States into the North American Union.

I feel like the couple at the start of the movie the idiocracy. Ugh...

Toxic Thoughts are not needed in life. :|

Be good to hear from anybody else.

 

[SpacePete]

I despise those machines at Supermarkets and always use a person. I can believe other people would chose convenience over somebody else having a job.

Its all about maximising profit and cutting costs. Nearly everyone hates those self-checkouts most of time unless you've got 1 or 2 items.

People don't choose these over somebody having a job, we are often forced to use them because the supermarket management has sacked many of the checkout people.

 

[Holdfast]

I'm looking forward to more robots!

Ever since I saw Cherry 2000

From 25 seconds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kckEEQKXaCU

 

[mmm....shiney!]

I despise those machines at Supermarkets and always use a person. I can believe other people would chose convenience over somebody else having a job.

Its all about maximising profit and cutting costs. Nearly everyone hates those self-checkouts most of time unless you've got 1 or 2 items.

People don't choose these over somebody having a job, we are often forced to use them because the supermarket management has sacked many of the checkout people.

Give me the self-serve checkouts any day!

 

[SpacePete]

I despise those machines at Supermarkets and always use a person. I can believe other people would chose convenience over somebody else having a job.

Its all about maximising profit and cutting costs. Nearly everyone hates those self-checkouts most of time unless you've got 1 or 2 items.

People don't choose these over somebody having a job, we are often forced to use them because the supermarket management has sacked many of the checkout people.

Give me the self-serve checkouts any day!

When the robot overlords come to take you away, the last words you will hear are "unexpected item in bagging area".

 

[Caput Lupinum]

As a shareholder in Woolworths, I do my bit and use the self-serve checkout whenever possible. It's a hell of lot quicker even with the odd bagging area error than standing behind half a dozen blue rinsers on pension day or when you get someone disputing 20 cents for an item on special and wait for someone to go and check the price only to find it is the correct price.

 

[smk762]

I tend to line up for the old lady working the checkout so she's not forced onto the pension.

Related video work looking at (there's a shorter version if you're ADD) -
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SuGRgdJA_c[/youtube]

 

[hawkeye]

I'm pretty sure there have been quite a few threads about this, you might like to do a search on them.

Suffice to say, no, robots are not about to bring about the end of civilization.

Yes, they will take many jobs as machines have been doing for over 100 years.

Yes, it will make average joe's life better and give him more leisure time than before, just as it has been for the last 100 years.

No, we will not all lose our jobs, but it is highly likely we will all need to do less work and less strenuous work.

Yes, mainstream economists are leading us all down the garden path with all their rubbish. Economies are stagnating because of their debt loads, not because machines are stealing all our jobs. It's because we are all in massive debt to the banks and wall street types who have been enabled by government and it's false economic theories.

Any questions?

 

[SpacePete]

Jobs are disappearing faster than new opportunities are appearing.

The pace of improvements in automation technologies is accelerating and we are seeing clear evidence now that workers are being replaced by technology faster than new opportunities are created.

It is possible to do more with less workers across a large and growing spectrum of industries.

This chart show the gap starting to diverge:

 

[bordsilver]

 

[SpacePete]

http://i.imgur.com/jcrsxFP.jpg

Productivity as a measure of efficiency, or the ratio of output to input, can be both good and bad. Concern over potentially large shifts in employment are not anti-technology, anti-progress or anti-productivity. It's a concern over what we are actually going to be doing in the future to earn a living. Will new opportunities arise? Will we be able to adapt fast enough? Will a living wage be introduced? Will there be massive social unrest? That sort of thing.

BTW: Massive improvements to the ratio of output to input are not always beneficial if you are on the wrong side of the equation:

 

[SweetBread]

Alot of big questions we will all have to face in the future.
I have worked as an electrician on big resource projects, some of my favourite affirmations are.

Efficiency = Redunduncy
More delay more pay.

 

[renovator]

Alot of big questions we will all have to face in the future.
I have worked as an electrician on big resource projects, some of my favourite affirmations are.

Efficiency = Redunduncy
More delay more pay.

This has been going on for decades . I remember in the 80's My mate who owns a labour hire company got me into BHP for the xmas shutdown refurb as an engineer/fitter (im a builder) lol & the inefficiencies of the ticketed BHP engineers was woeful . After a few days of working with the neanderthals i was suggesting easier ways to do things more efficiently & pointing out their mistakes to one of the head engineers & promptly got shitcanned into the baghouse changing camlocks on the dustbags hahaha .That'll teach me to try to help :lol:

Oh well i didnt give a shit i still got the big money to help pay my mortgage at the time

They do things at a snails pace to ensure their positions dont become redundant & get rid of anyone who makes them look slow . You cant blame companies for automating things when you have people like that . What can be automated will be .

 

[mmm....shiney!]

You cant blame companies for automating things when you have people like that . What can be automated will be .

Yep, no one has a right to a job.

 

[SpacePete]

You cant blame companies for automating things when you have people like that . What can be automated will be .

Yep, no one has a right to a job.

But they do have the right to work.... (not necessarily the right to a job I think):

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Adopted by the UN General Assembly

Article 23.

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

 

[Yendor]

Efficiency = Redunduncy
More delay more pay.

And this is why businesses will always take robots over people.

Plus, once you've built a computer/robot/other to do a job, it can almost always do it better than a human. Even if it never pays off the cost in saved wages, increased productivity can still make it worthwhile.

Maybe a little simplistic, but if you don't want to be replaced by a robot, don't chose a job that a mindless machine can do better.

 

[mmm....shiney!]

You cant blame companies for automating things when you have people like that . What can be automated will be .

Yep, no one has a right to a job.

But they do have the right to work.... (not necessarily the right to a job I think):

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Adopted by the UN General Assembly

Article 23.

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

It's interesting that the UN dec says we have a right to protection from unemployment. Who is to provide that? Governments? The UN charter is a means by which governments justify their existence.

Humans are entitled to be productive or not. That's all.

 

[JulieW]

Alot of big questions we will all have to face in the future.
I have worked as an electrician on big resource projects, some of my favourite affirmations are.

Efficiency = Redunduncy
More delay more pay.

This has been going on for decades . I remember in the 80's My mate who owns a labour hire company got me into BHP for the xmas shutdown refurb as an engineer/fitter (im a builder) lol & the inefficiencies of the ticketed BHP engineers was woeful . After a few days of working with the neanderthals i was suggesting easier ways to do things more efficiently & pointing out their mistakes to one of the head engineers & promptly got shitcanned into the baghouse changing camlocks on the dustbags hahaha .That'll teach me to try to help :lol:

Oh well i didnt give a shit i still got the big money to help pay my mortgage at the time

They do things at a snails pace to ensure their positions dont become redundant & get rid of anyone who makes them look slow . You cant blame companies for automating things when you have people like that . What can be automated will be .

I had a friend who went to work at Department of Defense in clerical. After about 12 months she gave her 'manager' a list of improvements that could be made and efficiencies that could be improved. (She had broached the question with him - 'would you like my observations after 12 months here').

He was apparently surprised to see her return with her list and leaned back in his chair and said words to the effect: " People like you often come in and think of things to improve the place but we have our way of doing things. I suggest you just go along." He also mentioned that promotions came to people who stayed on and didn't rock the boat.

She decided to not rock the boat and spent most of her day on personal business and surfing the internet. She was promoted about 6 months later for being so efficient (as she put it, the job took 2 days and I had to be there for 5 days). Now she is sitting at the former manager's desk, no doubt organising our defense against terrorists - and squashing other 'work' initiatives.

/sarcasm button
/irony button
/anger button

 

[SpacePete]

Yep, no one has a right to a job.

But they do have the right to work.... (not necessarily the right to a job I think):

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Adopted by the UN General Assembly

Article 23.

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

It's interesting that the UN dec says we have a right to protection from unemployment. Who is to provide that? Governments? The UN charter is a means by which governments justify their existence.

Humans are entitled to be productive or not. That's all.

Governments interference, especially on response to lobbying, is substantial but sometimes can be beaten. For example:

The right to work as a self-employed professional came under regulatory attack throughout the 20th Century, when numerous U.S. states passed laws requiring licensing, testing, and other arbitrary educational requirements (such as requiring that the prospective worker donate thousands of hours of work as an unpaid or low-paid "intern" before being allowed to work at their chosen profession).

The Friedmans reported in 1980 that "Today you are not free to offer your services as a lawyer, a physician, a dentist, a plumber, a barber, a mortician or engage in a host of other occupations, without first getting a permit or license from a government official."

Many of these laws were attempts by existing professionals in a field to restrict others from competing with them, thereby limiting consumer choice and driving up prices for their own benefit. In response, entrepreneurs and activists have won numerous court cases securing constitutional protection for the right to earn a living. These cases have won the right to work for Louisiana monks who sell caskets, Philadelphia tour guides, Colorado taxi drivers, and Connecticut interior designers.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_work

 

[bordsilver]

The whole machines will take our jobs/it's different this time thing has repeatedly cropped up ever since the agriculture revolution began and has been consistently proven wrong.

Amateur social scientists such as Norbert Wiener (a professional mathematician) predicted, in 1949, that we faced "a decade or more of ruin and despair" from the wholesale unemployment which would occur in the 1950's. Cybernation and automation were going to abolish jobs at an unprecedented rate. The prediction was reaffirmed by a parade of witnesses in the mid-1950's before a Congressional committee investigating automation. Yet, the 'decade or more of ruin and despairo from the un-employment that was going to be caused by automation appears to have been postponed by at least 17 years. Nevertheless, we still have doom criers who say that this consequence of automation will be appearing in the near future.

The Ad Hoc Committee on the Triple Revolution has issued a Manifesto (March 1964) which declares that the advent of complex computers and self-regulating machines introduces an historical break in the evolution of social processes.

"A new era of production has begun. Its principles of organization are as different from those of the industrial era as those of the industrial era were different from the agricultural." The new machines introduce an era of unlimited productive capacity. The new machines are displacing people in droves from manufacturing and agriculture and will soon displace them from the service industries. Men cannot compete with these machines. Poverty is expanding and it has become impossible to achieve full employment. Judgement Day is coming.

Despite the fact that the predictions of its coming have been constantly disappointed, it will be upon us soon, you sinners, so repent while there is still time.

In the late 1700's, machines such as the loom and the spinning jenny were about to bring the end of the world upon us. Edward Baines, the historian, writing in 1834, made the following comment about these predictions:

- "At the accession of George III (1760), the manufacture of cotton supported hardly more than 40,000 persons; but since machines have been invented by means of which one worker can produce as much yarn as 200 or 300 persons could at that time, and one person can print as much material as could 100 persons at that time, 1,500,000 or 37 times as many as formerly can now earn their bread...

- "Any yet there are still many, even scholars and members of Parliament, who are so ignorant or so blinded by prejudice as to raise a pathetic lament over the increase and spread of the manufacturing system... there are persons who regard it as a great disaster when they hear that 150,000 persons in our spinning works now produce as much yarn as could hardly be spun with the little handwheel by 40,000,000."

In the 1870's and 1880's, the spread of mechanization showed that the end was in sight. David Ames Wells, writing on Recent Economic Changes in 1889, reported that:

"The power to excavate earth, or to excavate and blast rock, is from five to ten times as great as it was when operations for the construction of the Suez Canal were commenced, in 1859-60. The machinery sent to the Isthmus of Panama, for the excavation of the canal at that point, was computed by engineers as capable of performing the labor of half a million of men.

"The displacement of muscular labor in some of the cotton mills of the United States, within the last ten {ears, by improved machinery, has been from thirty-three to fifty percent, and the average work of one operative, working one year, in the best mills of the United States, will now, according to Mr. Atkinson, supply the annual wants of 1,600 fully clothed Chinese, or 3,000 partially clothed East Indians. In 1840 an operative in the cotton mills of Rhode Island, working thirteen to fourteen hours a day, turned off 9,600 yards of standard sheeting in a year; in 1886 the operative in the same mill made about 30,000 yards, working ten hours a day. In 1840 the wages were $176 a year; in 1886 the wages were $285 a year.

"The United States census returns for 1880 report a very large increase in the amount of coal and copper produced during the ten previous years in this country, with a very large comparative diminution in the number of hands employed in these two great mining industries; in anthracite coal the increase in the number of hands employed having been 33.2 percent, as compared with an increase of product of 82.7; while in the case of copper the ratios were 15.8 and 70.8, respectively. For such results, the use of cheaper and more powerful blasting agents (dynamite), and of the steam drill, furnish an explanation. And, in the way of further illustration, it may be stated that a carload of coal, in the principal mining districts of the United States, can now (1889) be mined, hoisted, screened, cleaned, and loaded in one half of the time that it required ten years previously.

The report of the United States Commissioner of Labor for 1886 furnishes the following additional illustrations:

"In the manufacture of agricultural implements, six hundred men now do the work that, fifteen or twenty years ago, would have required 2,145 men-a displacement of 1,545.

"The manufacture of boots and shoes offers some very wonderful facts in this connection. In one large and long-established manufactory the proprietors testify that it would require five hundred persons, working by hand processes, to make as many womens' boots and shoes as a hundred persons now make with the aid of machinery-a displacement of eighty per cent.

"Another firm, engaged in the manufacture of children's shoes, states that the introduction of new machinery within the past thirty years has displaced about six times the amount of hand-labor required, and that the cost of the product has been reduced one half.

"On another grade of goods, the facts collected by the agents of the bureau show that one man can now do the work which twenty years ago required ten men.

"In the manufacture of flour there has been a displacement of nearly three fourths of the manual labor necessary to produce the same product. In the manufacture of furniture, from one half to three fourths only of the old number of persons is now required. In the manufacture of wallpaper, the best evidence puts the displacement in the proportion of one hundred to one. In the manufacture of metals and metallic goods, long-established firms testify that machinery has decreased manual labor 33 1/3 per cent.

"In 1845 the boot and shoe makers of Massachusetts made an average production, under the then existing conditions of manufacturing, of 1.52 pairs of boots for each working day. In 1885 each employee in the State made on an average 4.2 pairs daily, while at the present time in Lynn and Haverhill the daily average of each person is seven pairs per day, showing an increase in the power of production in forty years of four hundred per cent.

"In the early 1900's electrification meant that the end was at hand.

Annual productivity growth is only 1-3 per cent at the moment. This is far, far less than what was being experienced in the past and yet this time it's different is the oft repeated mantra. It's all bullshit. Society gets richer as a result of productivity. Poverty is lessened not exacerbated. More jobs exist today than ever existed at any time in our history. The number of jobs has grown, not declined or even remained static.