Slashdot Mirror
Foxconn To Employ 1 Million Robots
hackingbear writes "Taiwanese technology giant Foxconn will replace some of its workers with 1 million robots in three years to cut rising labor expenses and improve efficiency. Foxconn, the world's largest maker of computer components, which assembles products for Apple, Sony and Nokia, employing 1 million (human) laborers in mainland China, is in the spotlight after a string of suicides of workers at its massive Chinese plants. As labor regulations tighten up in China, human laborers demanding wage rises become replaceable."
I for one welcome our robotic overlords!
Labor costs are rising in China making capital more cost-effective. So why are we still outsourcing manufacturing to China?
What happens when the robots start committing suicide?
No doubt they will pass the savings onto us... And iPads will be cheaper than a bushel of wheat, even if they are a bit crunchy
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
We've heard of Peak Oil. I wonder if there's Peak Employment? And have we reached it? There are so many SF stories of robots making people obsolete, of that being such a strong and recurring theme in the genre, that they have to be on to something.
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
Dunno if it's a bad sentence, but if ""Taiwanese technology giant Foxconn will replace some of its workers with 1 million robots" I would be flattered if it took one million robots to replace me.
Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
Foxconn HQ is in Taiwan, but most of the employees are on the mainland. Are they planning to move more production back to Taiwan?
Many of us on the left have long argued that socialism was the only way to deal with the consequences of rising productivity and automation: that in a world in which we have permanently moved beyond labor scarcity, the current system is unworkable.
But what were they hiring before? I know it was not skilled labor for a fair wage, or every chunk of shit I have bought in the last few years would not have killed itself in embarrassment.
The alternative approach is that we all work less, and find different things to make for each other. 100% socialism is pretty much discredited in humans anyway. Given a chance we will sit on our fat arses until we die of premature heart disease.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Intriguing. Do you feel the same way about people who buy products from the other companies that Foxconn manufactures for, like Cisco, HP, Nintendo etc.?
I thought one of the major driving forces to outsourcing was that human labour was cheaper than mechanization. Provided, of course, that the human labour accepted minimal standards for employment (pay, safety, etc.). And that's exactly what developing nations provided.
And now manufacturers in these nations are talking about increased mechanization in order to circumvent the desire of workers for better conditions of employment. In a lot of respects, it sounds like we (in the western world) just shot ourselves in the head: we shipped out the low skill jobs and we don't have the infrastructure for the high skill jobs needed in highly mechanized factories.
You can jump like a Krogan, out of the window But you'll never be as valuable as cannon fodder.
...they'll start learning how to operate or repair robots now. Jobs may disappear, but they get replaced by other ones.
looks like we're slowly moving towards what http://thevenusproject.com/ describes. mebbe it's time to replace all those politicians who can't behave by some sort of AI that surely will do better in managing the distribution of resources.
The idea is that by automating menial tasks, humans can devote themselves to "higher-level" tasks and less menial jobs. But for those being replaced that transition will of course be a significant change because they need to find something else to do.
Here in Norway there is a number of people who scoff at service workers, academics and "desk workers" and claim that only the "primary professions" (farming, fishing, logging etc.) and industry are contributing value. However, those areas have been automating and "optimizing" for centuries and do not need as many laborers as they seem to think. Plus, every business that is in demand adds value, especially by the way economists count the GNP (where e.g. farming here contributes a measly 0.5% while the education sector alone dwarfs it significantly).
All you young'uns read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_Piano when you've finally got off my lawn.
There's an 'interesting' economic problem and endgame in full automation too, most humans aren't 'earning' [except the ones twiddling the robotic controls, that can be done by other robots too] and so they don't have any wages to 'consume'. The utopian 1950s view of this was vastly increased leisure, flying cars and people in white togas. The 2000s view is probably a vast undernourished resentful underclass and maximised value for 'shareholders'.
Oh well, I guess the world just fills up with robot-prduced Barbies [tm] in big warehouses and the masses east kibble [tm], three meals, every day.
On y va, qui mal y pense!
The amount of junk that comes off a Foxconn assembly line is astonishing. I mean the produced goods that fail the QA and has to be junked, literally. Some of their newer factory lines have yields of only 40%, so robots make good commercial sence.
1 Million robots? No cheap labor? We can do that. Is China finally outgrowing it's limitless supply of cheap labor?
This would be a good thing if it didn't mean a consolidation of money in the hands of a few. Right?
Foxconn today introduced their first robot employee replacement. Company executives expect that Marvin, an android with embedded 'personality simulation protocols' will have a 'rousing and positive effect on the morale of our human employees.'
Well it could just be some managements, in some companies, in some counties, are looking beyond what will affect their next bonus check and are actually planning for the future.
And this could just have something to do with why their companies are expanding in a vibrant economy, while most most of the places you've worked at have economised for so many years for short term gains. Now having probably laid off half their labour force they are now wondering why no one can afford to buy their products.
N.B. this user is far too lazy to write a witty and intelligent sig.
Robots don't buy Androids. That would be like slavery.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
That is actually less true than you think. Many people work, hard, even though they don't need to. But while there will always be work to be done, we need to transition away from thinking that everyone needs to work: there are many people who should be paid *not* to work.
Socialism is not necessarily the coordination of all economic activity by a centralized national state. It is the end of the artificial distinction between political citizenship (where we have rights, and everyone is equal) and economic function (where you have no real rights except the "right" to compete, and we are not equal.) This artificial distinction was useful for a time, but I believe it has outlived its usefulness.
He was probably referencing Apple's dependance upon branding - they don't just sell technology, they sell a lifestyle.
... I think we will call this the beginning of the "Post Labor Age." We've had the industrial revolution, the computer revolution and the Internet age.
>> I seriously think that we CANNOT keep society intact and life civil without changing the way we look at "earning a living." We already have so many "make work" jobs in our economy -- to keep people busy. I'd say that only 5% of us even do something necessary.
And before you tell everyone how NECESSARY your job is -- consider that marketing, accounting, legal and sales are all about "distributing" or influencing people to purchase. Tax complications, keep many accountants employed. Haggling with insurance companies for a Doctors office.
Once automation is able to replace most construction, and expert systems most accountants and boiler-plate legal work -- the amount of money that goes to those who OWN these smart factories of the future will be greater -- and the demand for labor, less.
The planet just hit 7 Billion people and it is estimated, we are using resources that would require 1 and a half earths to fulfill (an estimate of the "load bearing" capacity of the planet).
>> AS harsh as we are now in the USA to what we call "deadbeats", I think we are a generation away from most people being useless -- intensive education of the brightest, or the OWNING of resources and patents will only employ a small percentage of the population.
It could be a golden age -- or a Darwinian nightmare -- it all depends on how we deal with this as a society. I fear that the Wealthiest, are too busy trying to create a police state and already look upon the teaming masses as useless eaters.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
Each time technology puts people out of work, it's not like those people are out of a job and that's the end of the story. The left would have you believe that they will be on the streets, lives ruined. History has shown this simply is not the case. Each time technology comes along and replaces human-labor, the availability of human-labor in the market rises. That now freed-up man-power becomes a driving force in the market to produce newer, better things, and the cycle starts all over again. Don't forget about things like art, music, entertainment. Those things can not be replaced by machines, and machines will simply free up the time of your idealistic thinking minds to do more creative works. Those creative works can often produce an income just as good as a common labor job, and be more "rewarding" at the same time.
I guess I can look forward to reading stories about robot suicides in a year or two...
#DeleteChrome
The Spacers would be proud.
PS: I don't reply to ACs.
We humans have been inventing stuff to make the workday easier for 15,000 years, and we STILL work 40+ hours a week with literally suicidal conditions in some places. What gives?
That is actually less true than you think. Many people work, hard, even though they don't need to. But while there will always be work to be done, we need to transition away from thinking that everyone needs to work: there are many people who should be paid *not* to work.
Socialism is not necessarily the coordination of all economic activity by a centralized national state. It is the end of the artificial distinction between political citizenship (where we have rights, and everyone is equal) and economic function (where you have no real rights except the "right" to compete, and we are not equal.) This artificial distinction was useful for a time, but I believe it has outlived its usefulness.
The problem is there hasn't been a "true" socialism" movement.
You don't want to have communism or the crappy socialism we've had up till now? Easy, stop making it so whomevers in charge, has no one to answer to.
We have to put check and balances in, and make it so everyone has someone to report to. No lifelong Senate positions, no lifelong government positions. Everyone does there part.
The problem is, with most government, is there are loopholes for people to stay in power. That will change.
But of course, the problem is, people are greedy and would rather let the world go to hell instead of actually change to make it better.
Be seeing you...
The "invisible hand of the market" always finds a way. I'm of the opinion that there will always be things that only humans can do for other humans/themselves.
I think of pure mathematics as one example. Yes, there are computer algebra systems and even attempts at using computers to work out mathematical proofs. But, I doubt the 'art', the creativity, and the curiosity of pure mathematics can ever be written down in a finite program. (I'm also not entirely impressed with the computer software written for mathematics.)
The same goes with philosophy, but philosophy defies automation - by nature.
PS: I don't reply to ACs.
The rest of us have long argued that socialism is the only way to deal with rising productivity. So far, history has proven us right. Indeed socialism works so well in this respect that it is a crime doing nothing in places not specifically designated for doing nothing (called "factories").
The robots will be used to do simple and routine work such as spraying, welding and assembling which are now mainly conducted by workers, said Gou at a workers' dance party Friday night.
The guy really knows how to play the crowd.
This old canard again? No, the technology that puts people out of work has a tendency to do so because it's more efficient and doesn't cost as much. When the tractors replace the farmhands, or automated check stands replace cashiers, they do not require maintenance workers at a 1:1 ratio. For every bloke that becomes maintenance crew, there are going to be a couple more that are SOL. As generations go by, the production of newer, better things also happens to require much more sophisticated research alongside a much more aggressive approach to putting things out there.
Furthermore, art, music, and entertainment, are you kidding me?? Have you not seen American Idol, or any depiction of people breaking into Hollywood show business in popular media? People from all over the world, let alone all over the country, pour into California with hopes of making a living in entertainment. Film, games, musics, these fields are packed with small time and "starving" artists scrambling to fill every niche, all the while putting out far more media than anyone could ever watch or play or listen to.
I wonder how many people might kill themselves for having been replaced by a robot and have no job rather than killed themselves over nasty working conditions. I doubt the possibility really isn't that unrealistic.
I think I drove past there once. It had no parking lot, but there was a paddock for the unicorns.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Dissociative identity disorder? Why?
http://michaelsmith.id.au
They are right up to a point ... primary professions contribute true currency, to buy imports ... so they are more important. Not really relevant in Norway since you are an oil exporter though.
The primary professions insure people can live, secondary professions provide a society worth living in (for more than just the rich minority).
So companies "employ" robots now? I hope they pay them a fair wage.
sic transit gloria mundi
Roughly it can be called greed. Some people just don't have the ability to be happy even if they have all they need and then some. I think it has to be some kind of medical condition where it is imperative that you have more stuff than you can possibly have any use of and at the same time deny the same to others if you can. Some kind of hoarder-sociopath complex.
Can I light a sig ?
If you make it so that a person's job just involves deciding whether to push a button or not, some wiseguy will offer to take push 1000 buttons for the same wage.
;).
And so on till there is the same level of pain and suffering
It could be a golden age -- or a Darwinian nightmare -- it all depends on how we deal with this as a society. I fear that the Wealthiest, are too busy trying to create a police state and already look upon the teaming masses as useless eaters.
I picture China and other communist countries having less issues than us adjusting. It is probably right that they are one of the first countries to really employ robots. Though, It will be unfortunate if Foxconn forces the robots to suicide, too.
Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
Robot maintenance?
If we go from 100 people doing manual labor to ten fixing the robots, what do the other 90 people do?
the employment for unskilled manual labour was decimated, however many more jobs opened up in higher-level areas
Did one higher-level job open up for every single manual labor position that was eliminated? Or is it more like replacing 100 laborers with two engineers and eight mechanics and leaving 90 people unemployed?
Many people here in the USA and other nations have faced the decline in domestic manufacturing, which has been a big source in the surge in the Chinese market. I have suggested in the past that if the USA were to halt the import of goods from China for even three months, the Chinese economy might implode as a loss in jobs would cause all sorts of problems from people being out of work.
Now, picture what will happen if robots remove the jobs in China. People will be out of work, there will be no replacement jobs, and all hell will break loose over there. Malware and spam from China will go way up as people look to scam money from people around the world, and China as a whole will suffer. This is why the USA should be focused on robotics, since if the jobs won't be HERE, at least China won't benefit since manufacturing could return to the USA, even if manufacturing jobs won't really come back. If China doesn't have manufacturing to bring in money from the rest of the world, how long would it take before the Chinese government collapses as the economy there crashes?
100% employment nowadays is impossible and undesirable.
Then how should people who once did "repetitive crap jobs" but are now unemployed eat?
Let humans do the interesting work
What guarantee is there that enough "interesting work" will remain to provide people with a basic level of income for subsistence?
I AM BENDER. INSERT GERDER.
They are a Taiwanese company and could care less about China nationalism. They are like a US company in that they will figure out how to extract the most money. They have two choices because of wage inflation. 1) Automation. 2) Move to a cheaper country. They have obviously decided to do number 1. My guess is they will like end up with a similar amount of automation that Apple had in their factories circa 1986+.
With potentially 1million 'consumers' out of the mix i wonder what effect this will have on the overall economy growth of China.
I realize its not a HUGE percentage of people and sure they can still export and make a handful very wealthy, but with that many people out of work again, the local economies will have to suffer.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
IT needs apprenticeships and maybe even trade boards like electricians so IT working can not be forced to do unsafe things and have the right to stand up and not sign off on rushed work.
...brain the size of a planet, and they ask me to assemble these crummy iPhones. Call that job satisfaction, 'cause I don't.
Have gnu, will travel.
... till we have the first robot suicide then, I suppose.
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
China was beating out robot and hi tech tool assisted manufacturing because they were using humans as much like robots as they could. Undercutting places with high startup costs, high costs in adapting to change, and expensive maintenance -- which cut the number of well paid workers but could not beat the exploited low cost human workers.... until NOW....
Robotics will eventually win the global RACE TO THE BOTTOM. Meanwhile, our economic system depends upon constant growth when we have limited resources and limited consumption. We will eventually not be able to buy enough CRAP we don't need to keep all the meaningless jobs related to producing and selling that CRAP. Productivity increases will make sure that happens... Sure everything could be disposable and that would prolong everything until you run out of resources... then you have to create affordable recycling to prolong it a bit longer...
Of course we just have to progress even faster and further into our war against the natural order of things so we can understand enough to avoid all the downsides our advancement creates. Its quite possibly a catch-22 situation where we never get to the point of 'utopia' because each step forward pushes the goal further off by creating more problems to solve. (or it may be possible, but take millennium and the surviving the journey may be improbable.)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
I for one enjoy the the savings of not having to buy everything hand crafted, and often to higher quality (don't tell me a blacksmith with a hammer can crank out car paneling as well as a robot).
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
I mean, GM's ad department's already done the heavy lifting...
Well without the oil jobs vacuuming engineers from the other industries we would not have had the explosive growth in salaries that has led to industry jobs going out of the country, but would have had to keep focusing on the metallurgic industries where we were very advanced (and to a lesser extent still are).
Already Adam Smith, in 1776, realized that what you wanted to be was a country that imported raw materials and exported fabricated goods. For the most part Norway has always been a "developing country" in the sense that we mostly exported raw and intermediate goods. Example of the twisted economy at play: Norwegians fish herring, which is then shipped to Poland to be packed more cheaply than here, and then the boxes are shipped back to be sold to Norwegian consumers.
The main advantages to moving to China were cheap labor, free training, government subsidies (including land and building) and lower taxes.
Two of those are substantially eliminated by moving to robots. The current crises has left a huge amount of vacancies in industrial parks here in the U.S..
Given the current crisis, it is unlikely that we would lower taxes - but this cries out for a tax holiday on repatriated funds.
Once the capital is in place, the competitive advantage just get that much harder to overcome; we should do what we can to have those robots here. Robotic maintenance jobs will be where the robots are - not to mention all the jobs associated with the presence of the factory!
Since the 90s we've been feed a line about globalization and free trade, one which I used to believe in, that manufacturing jobs moving out of the US would be replaced with more valuable knowledge jobs at home, and that free trade would foster peace and prosperity throughout the world. Sort of the seeds of The Federation.
Something else is going on. All those knowledge based jobs are also being offshored. And now we hear that the slave labor wages paid to workers offshore, isn't cheap enough. We've been at war for a decade (it's our stupid decisions that make it so, but still, the world is hardly at peace). In our own country, workers try to destroy unions for hard to understand reasons -- maybe they feel everyone should suffer equally rather than realizing they've just sold themselves out.
I don't see what we got out of globalization. A small few became fabulously wealthy, but as a nation, we've gotten jack, and now even those overseas who benefitted are getting the shaft.
I don't know what the solution is honestly, but what we have now is not it.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Because this Chinese are willing to piss in their own pool when it comes to environmental regulation and preservation. When you don't care about poisoning your population and ruining your water, air and land, you can undercut anyone who is unwilling to follow that path; all other things (i.e. technology level) being equal.
Specialization is a pretty basic to macroeconomics. The US makes airplanes. We make movies and music. We make medicines. We make cotton, corn, and wheat. We make IP, and then sue companies from other nations over patents and make money off of their goods as well as our own. Unemployment right now isn't at the low level we'd like it to be, but that's because of a recession, not because the Chinese are making our computers.
The jobs we outsource are jobs we don't actually want because they don't pay well enough and are pretty unskilled. If somebody with no education is willing and able to do the job for pennies a day, we should be glad to let them do it and profit off their labors, getting those valuable goods far far cheaper (increasing our standard of living), or selling the stuff they make to the rest of the world. The free market determines the value of the labor involved in making these devices, and let's face it, the value of that labor is not that high. The work is done very efficiently and takes minimal training or education. Nobody in the US would be happy with those jobs' hours, salary, or benefits.
If a job can be done by a robot, it's not a job anyone is going to pay an (American) living wage for you to do. Humans make far better thinkers, designers, innovators, and entertainers. Those are the jobs we have here, and those are the jobs valued high enough so workers can get paid to live to the standard we've become accustomed to.
-mrxak
Onions Will Kill You
a vastly smaller number of people than will be put out of work by them, by a factor of thousands at least
http://jalopnik.com/cars/ad-watch/super-bowl-ad-watch-gm-forces-robot-to-kill-self-233617.php
The "slave labor" wages we've been paying are plenty good enough for us. But WE are the ones complaining about the working conditions there, not considering the fact that in 3rd world or developing countries, the citizens would damn near kill to have a job with such horrible working conditions because it's a huge step up from the alternative. Now we've complained, and those very people who were perfectly happy with the jobs that no Americans wanted to do at a pay rate that none of us want to work at, are going to lose those jobs, just to make us happy. And don't delude yourself into thinking that unemployment in China is as great as it is here. I'm guessing people who have been out of work for 2+ years don't have half of a congress going to bat trying to get them yet another extension to their unemployment benefits.
The sad thing is, we could have had this here. Robotic assembly lines DO replace the low skill jobs, and they DO cost a lot of R&D and capital investment up front to get operational, but in the long run they are a lot less expensive and create a lot of newer high-tech jobs. But those new jobs require people to have skills and education, and they replace the low skill jobs by basically eliminating them. Unions have a tendency to resist such things, because yes.. they are NOT worker friendly for the guy who's job is about to get replaced by a machine. No doubt about that. So if a company is going to face a 10 year cycle of slowly upgrading their operation to eliminate their workforce, facing union resistance the whole way, or suddenly offshore the whole operation, and receive the same financial benefit, which would YOU choose? Now it's come full circle, but instead of having those robotic manufacturing operations here in the United States, where all of the jobs related to designing, building, deploying, and maintaining the robotic workforce would be US based, we get none of it. But we still pay for all of it, since we still buy all of those products. And just think, we got this way because too many people wanted to meddle in someone else's working conditions.
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
Eventually you'll have a couple of hundred people owning robotic factories that produce everything the world needs. Only, since the rest of the world can no longer sell their labor, they can not buy the products of these factories. So these owners really do end up with full warehouses and no customers. Lack of demand leads to lack of revenue, lack of profits, and resultant bankrupcy (because the factories cost lots of money whether they are running full tilt or idling). A good way out is to return to a pseudo-manorial system where each community is self-sufficient in basic needs. Population density would need to be reduced however, for each community to have enough land to grow food. Once they have food, clothing (linen), and shelter, they can start thinking about exports. This way nobody has to work for anybody but their community, and the community always has work because large-scale automation would not be practical at that scale. Seriously people, a few hours playing any strategy game will make this painfully obvious to anybody.
Socialism doesn't work either, but for a different reason. When you get equal distribution of paychecks nobody has incentive to do anything. Socialist citizens gravitate toward entertainment and drinking (well, we russians do anyway), while anything difficult is done shoddily or not at all.
He was probably referencing Apple's dependance upon branding - they don't just sell technology, they sell a lifestyle.
Funny, I thought I was just buying a portable Unix machine.
Perhaps you could define this "lifestyle" you speak of?
do Linux and Windows also have "lifestyles"?
If so, how exactly do they differ from each other?
Who is the "we" here? What you should have said is "the jobs companies outsource are the ones that workers don't actually want because they don't pay well enough," and phrased like that, it is obviously not true. Workers here want those jobs. But so do workers elsewhere, and they can ask for lower wages than anyone here can and still afford to live. It isn't that those jobs don't pay well enough. It is that they can't pay well enough.
And, yes, "companies should be glad to let them do it and profit off their labors." And they are. But the workers here are less happy. Outsourcing makes those goods cheaper, yes, but not free, so a worker would still need an income to enjoy those goods. And they don't have a income, because they don't have a job.
We need jobs. And jobs are rarer these days. And not because of outsourcing, either, not primarily. Jobs are scarce because everything requires less labor. And not just blue-collar, unskilled labor. We need less skilled labor too. Architects need fewer draftsmen, lawyers need fewer paralegals, large companies need fewer librarians. All support staff has generally been gutted.
We will need a basic living stipend very VERY soon, be it called permanent unemployment benefits or the purple wage. But given how entrenched and delusional politicians have become — especially Republicans — I have little hope of seeing any orderly steps in that direction. I forsee nothing but economic crisis after economic crisis.
i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
News for you. The US is not the most important market anymore and it definitely will not be in future. In addition all the components from your iPhones, Androids, netbooks etc come already from South Korea, Japan, Taiwan or China. So it make more sense to assemble the stuff there.
In the military airplane segment it is basically a worldwide contest between the US and Russia. Perhaps in a decade China will also compete for these sales on a global, rather than regional, level.
I find myself listening a lot to Japanese music lately after being influenced by anime shows. Japanese culture also permeates a lot through the ASEAN countries more than one could think at first. Regarding movies the main issues are capital and funding. Other countries with a lot of capital will invest in movies eventually. Much of the "US" music and movie industry was bought by Japanese concerns in the 80s (Sony Pictures Entertainment) or European concerns (Vivendi, Bertelsmann) in the 90s. If the US government does force China into valuating the Yuan I have little doubt they would go on a US corporation shopping spree like the Japanese and the Europeans did before.
And this pushes people to get an education, rather than thinking they can get through life by putting in the least amount of effort. If we want the species to become more intelligent with each new generation, we need to change society into WANTING to be more intelligent, and letting the criminally stupid just die out, or have fewer children compared to those with more intelligence. Stop trying to save the stupid people, because we should WANT them to be weeded out of the gene pool!
Sorry, but not all people are cut out for higher education.
There are lots of people who can be productive without over-educating the entire population. This isn't elitism -- it's a fact that not every person is appropriate for school and it would be a good thing if those people could make a productive living. This is where the true elitism lays -- that if you don't get a higher education, well, fuck you, you're a stupid redneck. That's not a good situation for those people and it is very bad for America.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
There's an 'interesting' economic problem and endgame in full automation too...
Full automation is not remotely possible with any reasonably foreseeable technology we possess. Not even necessarily for purely technical reasons. The primary limits are actually economic. There are a great many tasks for which are sufficiently complex that the automation required to do the task would cost FAR more than the task is worth. Automation typically has a high up front fixed cost which needs a significant volume or VERY high value to make economically reasonable. When you deal in complex tasks that come in small quantities (and there are LOTS of them), it often makes sense to utilize humans to do the job. It is economically impossible to create flexible automation that is cheap enough for full automation to be possible even if we could technically accomplish it ... which we cannot.
The notion that we are going to automate away all the jobs is a foolish notion, particularly when so much of the world can be hired for very low wages.
I think of pure mathematics as one example. Yes, there are computer algebra systems and even attempts at using computers to work out mathematical proofs. But, I doubt the 'art', the creativity, and the curiosity of pure mathematics can ever be written down in a finite program. (I'm also not entirely impressed with the computer software written for mathematics.)
Why not? As I see it, computer-based mathematics is very young, perhaps six decades (aside from analogue computing systems which have a far older history). So you're unimpressed by the software that is out there today? What about a few decades from now?
My view is that mathematicians will eventually be needed, not to develop new work, but merely to comprehend the mathematical developments that machines have done.
Now, picture what will happen if robots remove the jobs in China. People will be out of work, there will be no replacement jobs, and all hell will break loose over there.
Indeed, look at what happened in the US when internal combustion engines took the jobs of nearly 90% of all farm workers in the US between 1880 anf 1950!
Oh yeah, they found something else to do...
The rest of us have long argued that socialism is the only way to deal with rising productivity. So far, history has proven us right.
As I see it, it is better to have rising productivity than to "deal" with it. Some problems cease to be problems when you use them effectively.
I am quite sure the Hitler thought the same thing.
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
Back when the Japanese economy was rising there was a lot of talk of automation, but it didn't pan out like expected. While Japanese industry uses a lot of robots, there appears to be an upper limit to the economic effectiveness of the current generation of robot technology. Robots can be cost effective, but it requires the maintenance and (re)programming costs to be low. Part of the reason for China's rise economically was that their labor was cheaper than robots. My guess is this automation effort will probably go the same way.
Here in the US, we have those people too. Most of them are academics and desk workers, oddly enough.
I guess I missed where this was an opportunity to spew racist nonsense and score points against "left wing" people.
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
I really don't have much faith in the idea that the average Chinese citizen is being encouraged to get a higher education. So far as I know the vast majority of them are just trying to find some way to exist, and their own government isn't doing much to help them in that.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
But aren't things in Russia shoddier now than they were during the USSR? Most every Russian over the age of 40 I know seems to think so.
Specialization is a pretty basic to macroeconomics.
Yes! That explains why the Germans make cars and sell them to the French, and in return the French make ... cars, and ... and sell them to the, the ... the Germans...
Wait, what?
I think you mean, specialization is fundamental to increaasing productivity at the firm and industry level. That is, in microeconomics.
The jobs we outsource are jobs we don't actually want because they don't pay well enough and are pretty unskilled.
Of course. That explains why since the recession bottomed out, nearly all the growth in employment in the USA has been in jobs that pay less than the median wage. ... Oh, wait.
There will always be a limited supply of some resources, like villas on top of the hill by the beach and people willing to provide certain services. So you'll have to have some sort of government to distribute these limited resources and it will become corrupted and you'll end up pretty much where we are now. Unless there is a way to create efficient and incorruptible government, all the projects and utopias and whatever to change world order will fail.
We need some sort of collective consciousness or a way to do ECC-like parity error detection on human group decision making to identify and isolate waste and corruption. Or get ourselves ruled by AI. Or develop training/brainwashing techniques that produce incorruptible efficient ruling class of Ubermensh (you can argue that medieval nobility was supposed to provide that, and they failed).
--Coder
If Marx is correct, socialism will develop into communism. If he is not, then another system will develop based on the political interactions of the people involved. Communism was a reasonable conceptual framework in an industrial economy that was still scarcity-based; a post-scarcity, low-labor society where the constraints are on housing and threats to sustainability, esp. when micro- and nano-fabrication becomes ubiquitous and marginal costs for producing objects drop to near-zero are too far off of Marx's radar to use his framework uncritically, The main insight that I maintain from Marx is the one I allude to above: that the division between Homo Economicus and Zoon Politikon is an artificial one convenient mostly to those who dominate economically.