a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by mk
mk  ·  4782 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Rise of the Machines
Last night as I pulled out of the parking lot at the airport, I gave a machine my ticket, then my credit card. I pulled up and left before the car next to me was done with the one human teller in the other lane. I mentioned to my wife that that was one more job that no longer needed a person.

The 21st century model seems to be: find a place where a person is doing a job, and see if you can do it without them. What are we going to do with these people? Seriously, take an uneducated or mildly educated person, and what job can't you imagine a machine doing? For me, manual labor in a complex environment, like construction or janitorial work comes to mind. Anything rote is game.





b_b  ·  4782 days ago  ·  link  ·  
Don't be so self righteous. Skilled labor is at risk, too, just not yet. As soon as you computer geeks write software that allows AI machines to solve complex tasks like thinking of, and carrying out, experiments that lead to new disease therapies, it'll be bye-bye scientists. Watson is already being deployed on a trial basis in some hospitals to aid in diagnosing diseases. Its a slippery slope to The Matrix from there!
zebra2  ·  4782 days ago  ·  link  ·  
Technology advancement has always led to more and more manual labor being displaced by automated processes. Unskilled labor is always in danger of being rendered obsolete.
mk  ·  4782 days ago  ·  link  ·  
I agree. However, the pace seems to have increased somewhat. Or, perhaps it is more perceptible right now as the recession might have cut nonessential workers, and now they are more easily and noticeably replaced. There definitely were centuries where your job might not have looked very different from that of your grandfather's. I can't see that being the case again any time soon.
AhimMoonchowsen  ·  4782 days ago  ·  link  ·  
Perhaps someday there will be a "machine tax". Any company that employs a machine to do what a human once did will be taxed at a higher rate proportional to the amount of people out of work. It's not too far-fetched.
b_b  ·  4782 days ago  ·  link  ·  
Its not far fetched at all. In fact, it is the only serious way to deal with the problem. Companies don't use machines because they are evil and want to put people out of work. They use machines because they are cheaper and much more quality controlled than a person could ever be.

I worked as an engineer at a V8 engine plant a few years ago. We had robots doing virtually all of the non-skilled labor in the entire plant and some of the skilled labor, too (milling raw steel casts, for example). A person comes with sick days, health costs, children, complaints, bathroom/lunch breaks and a union rep, just to name a few things. Each of these is indispensable for a worker, but non-existent to a machine. Additionally, companies are strongly incentivized to go robotic because many capital upgrades are partially or fully tax deductible (since, ironically, they "create jobs" for the producers of the capital acquisition). Companies don't exist to make products; they exist to make money. As such, tax policy is not just the best way, but the only way to change this trend.