Slashdot Mirror
Technologies Like Google's Self-Driving Car: Destroying Jobs?
Nerval's Lobster writes "For quite some time, some economists and social scientists have argued that advances in robotics and computer technology are systematically wrecking the job prospects of human beings. Back in June, for example, an MIT Technology Review article detailed Erik Brynjolfsson (a professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management) and a co-author suggesting that the evolution of computer technology was "largely behind the sluggish employment growth of the last 10 to 15 years." Of course, technological change and its impact on the workforce is nothing new; just look at the Industrial Revolution, when labor-saving devices put many a hard-working homo sapien out of economic commission. But how far can things go? There are even arguments that the technology behind Google's Self-Driving Car, which allows machines to rapidly adapt to situations, could put whole new subsets of people out of jobs."
The things these articles miss is that in the future you won't ever need to leave your house. People won't own a car much less a self driving one. You won't need a hyper loop because there will be no traffic on the empty freeways. There will still exist a need to move food, water, and air around. But people can stay home. Not like they have jobs to go to. :)
Nevermind the new jobs that this will enable.
I'm curious - what new careers do you foresee, that current professional drivers would qualify for?
I was a trucker for 20 years. I've just been given an offer of a place at a top 10 university to do a BEng (Hons) in Electronics Engineering. Not all of us do trucking because we're incapable of doing anything else and I find your insinuation that we are quite insulting.
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
Cancer is evolution on a cellular level, without any foresight into whether it's a good idea long term.
Apple evolved with the loss of Jobs. Remember that evolution doesn't imply change toward something we like, just a change to better fit the current situation. Apple seems to have evolved away from the tactics that made it so successful. I expect that this evolution will end up damaging Apple, possibly killing it, though that's likely wishful thinking on my part because I don't like the walled garden approach.
It could be that Apple evolved in a bad direction because a cell in Steve Jobs' liver evolved in a bad direction.
I swear, I haven't been smoking pot recently!
Technology only destroys jobs if you accept that the vast majority of the improvement in quality of life resulting from less labor required for survival should be reserved for a handful of plutocrats. Employment is low. Profits are high. Fewer people work more to get less out of fear that they will be cut next.
What technology can do is increase everyone's quality of life. Lower the work week to 32 hours and abolish the distinction between part time and full time employees and increase minimum wage to a scale that follows the cost of basic food, utilities, shelter and transportation (it would be around $18 an hour if it had been). More people working less and having more time for family or other hobbies that actually make life worth living.
When robots do all the work, Marx' old question about the ownership of the means of production (and of raw materials and land) becomes acutely relevant. If the top 1% own the robots, the 99% is pretty much useless. Robots will be able to provide the masses with a minimum of housing and comforts to keep them placated, and there will be a small middle class of researchers, technicians and entertainers, but that'll be it. Not a very bright future... When robots do all the work, socialism suddenly starts to look a lot more attractive (I never though I'd write those words).
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
How is that different than standing in front of a cab with a human driver?
The difference is that currently, most people avoid running into the streets, because there is considerable danger even if the closest car is far enough away to stop. When a large percentage of the cars on the road can auto-detect humans in the road and stop themselves, a pedestrian jaywalking problem seems inevitable. Rude people in large cities are already willing to just walk into traffic if it is slow enough. Another 20 years and there might not be much deterrent to taking a leisurely stroll across a highway as well.
In theory, a couple dozen people spread out along a highway could cause large slowdowns with little risk to themselves or the passengers, but I'm betting those artificial traffic jams will still be quicker to resolve than current ones since you can just send in the hoverdrones to stun & arrest the roadblockers.