These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Bill Gates: Yes, robots really are about to take your jobs

First post
Author
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#21 - 2014-03-25 10:11:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Slade Trillgon
XNCReman wrote:
And you thought raising the minimum wage is a good idea


I will bite troll. The reason the minimum wage needs to be raised is that corporations have raised the prices of their products to reflect inflation but have not done so with the wages....across most of the board. So this has absolutely nothing to do with rasing the minimum wage. Increasing the efficiency of the production line has always been about minimizing man power. Nothing new here so move along.


EDIT: Also I will suggest that you go read The Wealth of Nations so you can understand....you do not need to read the whole thing if you are unable to. The main point I bring up is covered fairly early on, and you may just acquire new troll bait Blink
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#22 - 2014-03-25 10:46:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
I don't know if you ever heard about the idea of Eden. One particular kind of Eden that is similar to a golden cage. You know, you are allowed to eat and reproduce, but with a "personal advisor" a God like entity, maybe even robotic AI. The idea of evil dissapeared for a cost of living a stable, healthy life and expressing yourself with creations, painting, making others happy. Every act considered offensive punished severely by throving someone out of the Eden. Monstrous or perfect? At least it is something plausible to some extend, when you don't have to expect famine, cold, boredom, but again being uniformly treated as averybody else by the "voice in the heavens". What would you do? Rebel or go on with creating the work of your life? Thru art, music, poetry, expanding your knowledge, perfecting the body?

I know couple of cults that made people think they will have this in afterlife, an "Eden" thing, but making them similar to zombies because all they want was their money and work for free. Caged minds for their own "good"?

No, i am not Sansha recruiter.
Bhaal
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2014-03-25 13:09:20 UTC
Quote:
Unless the governments provide sufficient unemployment payments that the unemployed can live comfortably and the problems will be solved.


Being unemployed should not be comfortable, if it is then all you're doing is breeding more entitled sloths who look to the government to hand them a nice life. If you want a nice life you have to work for it, you're not entitled to one just because you were born a human on the planet earth.

Also, working for minimum wage should not be comfortable either. Minimum wage jobs are not careers and should not be viewed as such. Minimum wage jobs do not, and should not afford the employee the ability to raise a family, careers are required for such life goals. This is all common sense that many socialists/communists fail to grasp.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#24 - 2014-03-25 13:27:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Bhaal wrote:
Being unemployed should not be comfortable, if it is then all you're doing is breeding more entitled sloths who look to the government to hand them a nice life. If you want a nice life you have to work for it, you're not entitled to one just because you were born a human on the planet earth.

Problem is, if we will consider even doing complete mechanised factories and farms and then they will be maintained by AI, when work will be done by the robots, the concept of work for money and for living will be outdated. We will need new model for society. Eden? We should fear that people and generally society model will not change so fast as technology is changing.
Bhaal
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2014-03-25 13:48:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Bhaal
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Bhaal wrote:
Being unemployed should not be comfortable, if it is then all you're doing is breeding more entitled sloths who look to the government to hand them a nice life. If you want a nice life you have to work for it, you're not entitled to one just because you were born a human on the planet earth.

Problem is, if we will consider even doing complete mechanised factories and farms and then they will be maintained by AI, when work will be done by the robots, the concept of work for money and for living will be outdated. We will need new model for society. Eden? We should fear that people and generally society model will not change so fast as technology is changing.



There is going to be a rough transition away from a monetary economy/society at some point I suspect, where it ends up, damn, who knows. I guess we're all lucky that we probably will not live through that. And to try to predict where things will go from our current vantage point, I think is a useless endeavor.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#26 - 2014-03-25 13:56:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Bhaal wrote:
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Bhaal wrote:
Being unemployed should not be comfortable, if it is then all you're doing is breeding more entitled sloths who look to the government to hand them a nice life. If you want a nice life you have to work for it, you're not entitled to one just because you were born a human on the planet earth.

Problem is, if we will consider even doing complete mechanised factories and farms and then they will be maintained by AI, when work will be done by the robots, the concept of work for money and for living will be outdated. We will need new model for society. Eden? We should fear that people and generally society model will not change so fast as technology is changing.



There is going to be a rough transition away from a monetary economy/society at some point I suspect, where it ends up, damn, who knows. I guess we're all lucky that we probably will not live through that. And to try to predict where things will go from our current vantage point, I think is a useless endeavor.

History teaches us, that often what we predicted was only partially true, or partially false, there is no way we will know it all. What we need to do, is to act regarding our fellow man and ourselves in this whole technological heaven/hell. But then again, i think people will not grow up to that, and there will be many poor people left there on streets doing mischeef.
Slymah
DorpCorp
#27 - 2014-03-25 15:16:33 UTC
I wish a robot would/could do my job
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#28 - 2014-03-25 17:34:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Quote:
I wish a robot would/could do my job


If you could afford that robot today, who will be taking the money, I expect that you will be taking those, not a robot.
What will you do with those money? Maybe you will pay for maintenance to another man with his robot, and food for yourself, food that will be produced by another robot, that is someone elses property.

In the end people will just give money from hand to hand and robots will work for free, maintained by other robots. Why these money in the first place, when mechanized slavery could take care of itself in the end, and with AI for sure.

When mechanized factories, mines, farms producing goods and resources will be used to produce for everybody for free, food taken to the doors by drones, and personal advisor in mind will count calories for people, what property would have those people that would be fated to consume those goods, what will be their role in this all? Will they be just a thinking, artsy mass with full bellies, crazed with inflicting pleasure on themselves?

I think that when you take away every work from a man, put him into only a consumer role, he starts to wander why he lives, what has meaning in his life, and why it has this meaning. Educated to be respectful to others, educated to be obedient, educated to think like you should think, a man thinking like his creation the "advisor", to be perfectly logical and sane, every thought compliant with personal "advisor", or else... what else? Humans being compliant with robots or what? Shocked

Maybe it is best to take the blue pill after all. Look at all this mess. At least we have choice now, but future generations? I don't know. Maybe there will be no red pill to take, and that will be the cruel reality of Eden...
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2014-03-25 21:06:01 UTC
So robots continue to streamline our menial labor without ever taking over the actual creative aspect. They get the blue collar work and consistently remain absent from the white collar work. How is this a sign that we're gonna lose our white collar jobs to robots?

The only issue I have with robots doing all my work is I won't get the money and some rich person who owns the robots will expect me to pay for their existence. Of course that's a sociopolitical problem that exists in almost every powerful society that has a few centuries to develop it. It's not a problem with robots.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#30 - 2014-03-25 21:46:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
So robots continue to streamline our menial labor without ever taking over the actual creative aspect. They get the blue collar work and consistently remain absent from the white collar work. How is this a sign that we're gonna lose our white collar jobs to robots?

The only issue I have with robots doing all my work is I won't get the money and some rich person who owns the robots will expect me to pay for their existence. Of course that's a sociopolitical problem that exists in almost every powerful society that has a few centuries to develop it. It's not a problem with robots.


As for a sign that we're gonna lose our white collar jobs to robots, we would first need to develop AI. There is concept of technological singularity regarding AI, you should read about it. Also there are people willing to develop it and pay for developing it, as I posted before.

As you noticed, it is not a problem with robots, the problem lies in human nature. Some rich person who owns the robots will have to expect that you will not pay for anything, because you would not have a job and money in the first place. The answer is probably an existence of machines that can be upholded only by selfsuficiency, and producing for the humans with nothing in return. That concept is opossed by people, its not "fair" for them, because now they need to price their work, in future howewer.... I don't know. But if they will not change, than for that kind of thinking you would probably need personality that is selfless, you would need something like particular kind of AI.
DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#31 - 2014-03-25 21:48:08 UTC
The only issue with robots doing art is they are not creative. You will have to program them, so an artist will have to do the programing and then they can replicate it. You will never technically get rid of human labor, because someone will have to repair the robots.

However, we might evolve to a kind of Star Trek based economy, people works because they want to, not for money. You would make wine because you like the taste of human made as opposed to replicated. Then you would give yoru goods away or barter with it. As all your other goods would be provided by automated or mechanized labor, in star trek this was replication. The replicator pretty much put everyone in manufacturing and ag out of business. If 3d printers become advanced you will see this happen, toss in robots doing a lot of the work and humans will just evolve past money.

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.

Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#32 - 2014-03-25 21:55:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
DaReaper wrote:
The only issue with robots doing art is they are not creative. You will have to program them, so an artist will have to do the programing and then they can replicate it. You will never technically get rid of human labor, because someone will have to repair the robots.


Yes you would get rid of human labor with technological singularity and maintaining system, that is AI in the form of intelligent net. Humans then could just drop dead in one second after developing that thing, and it would just go until earth is no more.

That was general idea behind Stanislaw Lem "The Invincible" book.


Wikipedia wrote:
It was one of the first novels to exploit the ideas of micro-robots (somewhat similar to the concept of nanobots), artificial swarm intelligence and "necroevolution", a term suggested by Lem for evolution of non-living matter.
DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#33 - 2014-03-25 21:58:13 UTC
Bhaal wrote:
Quote:
Unless the governments provide sufficient unemployment payments that the unemployed can live comfortably and the problems will be solved.


Being unemployed should not be comfortable, if it is then all you're doing is breeding more entitled sloths who look to the government to hand them a nice life. If you want a nice life you have to work for it, you're not entitled to one just because you were born a human on the planet earth.

Also, working for minimum wage should not be comfortable either. Minimum wage jobs are not careers and should not be viewed as such. Minimum wage jobs do not, and should not afford the employee the ability to raise a family, careers are required for such life goals. This is all common sense that many socialists/communists fail to grasp.



I'll do this two fold, as I am a socialist (not a communist, anyone who thinks they are same is an idiot)

1) In the world described in the op, where work is replaced by robots, people would have no choice in the matter. If you woke up tomorrow, and all jobs were done by a robot, and there was no jobs anyplace, except maybe as CEO or in advanced robotics (needing a phd) then you have no choice but to be unemployed. In that case your argument of 'unemployment should not be comfurtable' becomes invalid. if there is 99% unemployment, and will always be 99% unemployment... then work becomes history.

2) The thing that capitalist don't understand is its a failed model just like communism. Pure capitalism doesn't promote competition, nor does it protect anyone form anything. Companies and people no longer give a crap unless its in there own back yard, as to a CEO you are nothing but a number. And if they can save $X by cutting a corner here, or there, yet it kills some people then oh well. The US, become what we are today because people ****** it up for the rest of us. A lot of regulation nd laws came about due to some jackass thinking money was more important then human life. So the people got pissed and made the gov change it. The only thing that works is an equal partnership of business, gov, and the people. Working together. Each checks the other. Offten this gets lost as one or two grab power. Unemployment, as it is right now, along with welfare, should be a safty net. You use it for a limited time, then get off it ASAP. But they are needed. Min wedge should not be something you do perminatly. but at the same time, in this day and age where companies are shipping jobs to pay dirt poor labor, its getting harder and harder to find ways to move up, esp as companies insist that you do more with less people.

It's all a balance. Untill the mentality of as long as I get my $$$$ everyone else can **** off changes, it will just get worse.

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.

DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#34 - 2014-03-25 22:02:00 UTC
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
DaReaper wrote:
The only issue with robots doing art is they are not creative. You will have to program them, so an artist will have to do the programing and then they can replicate it. You will never technically get rid of human labor, because someone will have to repair the robots.


Yes you would get rid of human labor with technological singularity and maintaining system, that is AI in the form of intelligent net. Humans then could just drop dead in one second after developing that thing, and it would just go until earth is no more.

That was general idea behind Stanislaw Lem "The Invincible" book.


Wikipedia wrote:
It was one of the first novels to exploit the ideas of micro-robots (somewhat similar to the concept of nanobots), artificial swarm intelligence and "necroevolution", a term suggested by Lem for evolution of non-living matter.



I'm not sure that would work. I'm not a robot or ai specialist however, but while a robot can work things out faster, the human brain can come of things that don't think a robot could match. Yes a skynet type intel could run the earth forever, but never underestimate the power of human stupidity ;)

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.

Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#35 - 2014-03-25 22:23:46 UTC
For one thing I am sure, we should watch the people that are meddling with AI.
Maybe we should stop working on it and treat developing it as a crime, but when? When we start to fear it or earlier?
Is fear good advisor? Fear of being overwhelmed and devoured by your own creation?
Hesod Adee
Perkone
Caldari State
#36 - 2014-03-25 22:48:08 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Hesod Adee wrote:
Unless the governments provide sufficient unemployment payments that the unemployed can live comfortably and the problems will be solved.

When the free market won't solve a problem, then it is the duty of governments to step in and solve it.


Yes, let's solve problems by sticking a gun in eveyone's face and force them to do what *you* want.

Do you have any better solutions ?

Lets start with the hypothetical problem of automation getting so advanced that there aren't enough jobs for a large portion of the population. How would you stop them starving ?

Or for a more practical example, how would you stop violent crime without something similar to a police force telling people that they aren't allowed to kill other people and enforcing it by gunpoint where necessary ?

What about a corporation dumping its waste into the local water supply because brining water in for their workers, or at least the workers that aren't easily replaced, is cheaper than disposing of the waste safely ?

Bhaal wrote:
Quote:
Unless the governments provide sufficient unemployment payments that the unemployed can live comfortably and the problems will be solved.


Being unemployed should not be comfortable, if it is then all you're doing is breeding more entitled sloths who look to the government to hand them a nice life. If you want a nice life you have to work for it, you're not entitled to one just because you were born a human on the planet earth.


Also, working for minimum wage should not be comfortable either. Minimum wage jobs are not careers and should not be viewed as such. Minimum wage jobs do not, and should not afford the employee the ability to raise a family, careers are required for such life goals. This is all common sense that many socialists/communists fail to grasp.[/quote]
Even when the jobs don't exist ?

Because that is the hypothetical I'm talking about. People being unemployed because robots are cheaper mean there aren't enough jobs.

When the jobs exist, yes people should be encouraged to take them. But telling people to get jobs when the jobs don't exist is not a solution.
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2014-03-26 01:48:51 UTC
Abyss Azizora wrote:
Good, cheaper products.

It will be an interesting day when robots become consumers of these products, too. I recently went to a crash test site and I was daydreaming that the crash test dummies were walking around and smiling and laughing and rolling around in SUVs..

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.

Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#38 - 2014-03-26 08:55:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Sibyyl wrote:
Abyss Azizora wrote:
Good, cheaper products.

It will be an interesting day when robots become consumers of these products, too. I recently went to a crash test site and I was daydreaming that the crash test dummies were walking around and smiling and laughing and rolling around in SUVs..


You are humanizing the robots. Just like this guy here. Smile

Would we need another human? It would get bored really fast. It would create something to entertain himself. The idea of entertainment...

What about surpassing human nature, and designing the AI to be humanly creative, but only if it's needed by humans? A creative mechanized slave, a dancer with extending arms and legs? We would need for sure something what will surpase whole humanity, we would need a self sufficient system wih as many micromanaging capablities as there are machines ready to respond, also caring for human creators. System that will produce for humans, make commercials of AI designed goods, that will be respectful to human individualism?
Then humans will just choose what they want and take it. If used up and thrown away, it will be recycled by robots like a cow grazing the overgrown grass.

We now are bombarded by commercials that are creating urges for people who would even get loans to fulfill them, and part of the world is starving. What if in the future we will just consume and robots will entertain us, all equally healthy but differently groomed, because of individualism of human nature? Would people consume as much or as little as they want? What about quantity of consumers? What about reproduction, will human population be designed by AI, will humans be sterilised and produced like a goods? Sex only for entertainment, mother could choose child designed by AI. Who can stop future and for how long?
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2014-03-26 16:45:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
I'm sure some day we'll have robots that think, act, and learn like chordate animals do. It'll be a great stunt for science and its practical applications will be almost entirely within the domains of scientific research and show business. They will be far more expensive than equally creative humans, and the humans will be easier to employ.

And some day later we'll have robots that are more creative and intelligent than humans. But even if these become cheap, they still won't replace very many of our creative jobs. This simple fact exists because many of the creative jobs exist not for a work vacuum but for an entertainment vacuum. Robots are for work vacuums: we make them to do work that we don't want to do. We don't want to make them to replace our fun. We will make them to provide fun for us. Some will do creative work but bored humans will always do more.

Some day in the very distant future we will have access to so many cheap robot designs that the gap between the rich and the poor will cease to be highly meaningful in sparser populations, as it will be easy for any poor person to purchase or build robots to care for themselves by working unclaimed land somewhere. It is not this future that scares me, it is the much nearer future in which the uncreative worker robots are expensive, but rich companies buy them and lay off workers. This future begins where the space age ends. The first stages begun in the '70s and we have been in full swing since the '90s. It's not the future anymore. It's reality.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Adunh Slavy
#40 - 2014-03-27 13:04:38 UTC
Hesod Adee wrote:

Adunh Slavy wrote:

Unless the governments provide sufficient unemployment payments that the unemployed can live comfortably and the problems will be solved.
When the free market won't solve a problem, then it is the duty of governments to step in and solve it.

Yes, let's solve problems by sticking a gun in everyone's face and force them to do what *you* want.


Hesod Adee wrote:

Do you have any better solutions ?

Lets start with the hypothetical problem of automation getting so advanced that there aren't enough jobs for a large portion of the population. How would you stop them starving ?


It won't be by sticking a gun in someone's face and treating them.

And your hypothetical fantasy land is such a comfortable position isn't it? You make the rules, you set up your little non-sense dream world of issues and demand I impose a solution on your non-sense.

See, you just can't get away from your use of force. You're entire argument is non-sense.

Now to play your silly game, if automation becomes so cheap and easy, then in your fantasy land there will be a huge over abundance. The marginal utility of all that extra stuff will be so low, for the mythical greedy capitalists, that they won't worry about giving it away.

Your goofy argument is self defeating.

Hesod Adee wrote:

Or for a more practical example, how would you stop violent crime without something similar to a police force telling people that they aren't allowed to kill other people and enforcing it by gunpoint where necessary ?


Such a lame argument. Are you really twisted up inside? How deep does your cognitive dissonance go anyway? If you need the police to tell you it is wrong to kill people, then you are one seriously messed up individual.

Also consider, if people are so rotten and bad, that they need the police to force them not to kill each other, then do you really think that the tiny population of police, compared to the rest of us, could possibly stop the rest of us when we decide to go on a rampage?

Hesod Adee wrote:

What about a corporation dumping its waste into the local water supply because brining water in for their workers, or at least the workers that aren't easily replaced, is cheaper than disposing of the waste safely ?


Ever hear of the tragedy of the commons? No probably not. Go look it up.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt