Slashdot Mirror
More From Tim O'Reilly about the 'WTF?!' Economy (Videos)
More From Tim O'Reilly about the 'WTF?!' Economy (Video)
On August 12 we ran two videos of Tim O'Reilly talking with Slashdot's Tim Lord about changes in how we work, what jobs we do, and who profits from advances in labor-saving technology. Tim (O'Reilly, that is) had written an article titled, The WTF Economy, which contained this paragraph:
"What do on-demand services, AI, and the $15 minimum wage movement have in common? They are telling us, loud and clear, that we’re in for massive changes in work, business, and the economy."
We're seeing a shift from cabs to Uber, but what about the big shift when human drivers get replaced by artificial intelligence? Ditto airplane pilots, burger flippers, and some physicians. WTF? Exactly. Once again we have a main video and a second one available only in Flash (sorry about that), along with a text transcript that covers both videos. Good thought-provoking material, even if you think you're so special that no machine could possibly replace you.
"What do on-demand services, AI, and the $15 minimum wage movement have in common? They are telling us, loud and clear, that we’re in for massive changes in work, business, and the economy."
We're seeing a shift from cabs to Uber, but what about the big shift when human drivers get replaced by artificial intelligence? Ditto airplane pilots, burger flippers, and some physicians. WTF? Exactly. Once again we have a main video and a second one available only in Flash (sorry about that), along with a text transcript that covers both videos. Good thought-provoking material, even if you think you're so special that no machine could possibly replace you.
I'm seeing two rectangular divs with F in them (Flashblock extension at work). Just out of curiosity, I went to slashdot on my iphone, and it plays an html5 version of the video. So it's not a case of slashdot workers being so incompetent that they're unable to use html5, it's more like they decided to keep playing flash video for desktop users (for backward compatibility for people with old browsers) while serving up html5 for mobile users.
Automation has kept me employed for decades, someone has to design, build, configure and maintain the automata
I don't think you realize just how paltry all of those worker's wages are to the overall economy.... there is an absolutely *ENORMOUS* gap between the high income and low income earners, and even despite the vastly larger number of low income earners, they still collectively contribute to only a very tiny percentage of the overall economy.
Think "Pareto Principle".
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Well, about 2000 chinese noodle chefs were replaced by robot noodle chefs for the same reason robots are used everywhere.
Robots were less expensive (even than chinese noodle chefs), could work double shifts every day, 7 days a week and on holidays. When sick, they could be replaced the same day with a new one. The robots were more accurate, made less mistakes, had no legal liablity (no cut fingers, etc.) and the investors got to keep more money.
It's the end game that doesn't work. When 25% of the population can't get work because anything they can do can be done better, cheaper, and longer by a robot (or automated process -- i.e. computerized receptionists) then the system breaks down.
By definition, half the people are less than average intelligence. And many high intelligence jobs are being and will be automated as well.
The return is enormous (replace one or more highly paid humans with a machine or program) so the incentive is high.
The robot designer above is an excellent example. Sure- she'll continue to have work. But that's 1 job created for 1,000 jobs destroyed.
When people can't trade their labor for value/goods/housing/food what do you think is going to happen?
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
What's the motivation for replacing humans in various jobs with a robot?
To cut costs and/or improve quality.
The outcome is going to be terrible
Possibly. Then again, maybe not -- you've seen what the open Internet did for information (which is now easily available to most people at very low cost); perhaps robotics can do the same for goods and services.
"But what about all those people who will lose their menial jobs", you ask? They'll have to find some other way to make a living, is the answer. But with manufactured goods and services practically making themselves, that shouldn't be so difficult to do -- if nothing else, the government could put a tax on automation and use a portion of the wealth they generate to provide every citizen with a guaranteed stipend. People would then have time to learn more advanced skills that would make them employable again, or they could just become (effectively) retirees, and do things they enjoy rather than do menial work most of their lives. Either way, they wouldn't starve.
Of course that will require some political will, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. Our society has absorbed changes of similar magnitude before, it can probably do so again.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
The wealthy may only spend a tiny fraction of their money on consumer goods, but that is only because they have more money in the first place.... Over 70% of the GDP is accounted for by consumer spending, and the bottom 80% earners controlled only 5% of all financial wealth in the USA in 2013.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
The best possible result would be WalMart going bankrupt. They are a drain on all levels of government from city through federal. And they aren't too good for the private economy, either. They pay their people so little that if they worked full time they would qualify for general assistance and food stamps. But they won't let them work full time, because that might give them some rights.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.