Slashdot Mirror


Walmart Is Cutting 7,000 Jobs Due To Automation (yahoo.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Yahoo: The clairvoyant folks over at the World Economic Forum warned of a "Fourth Industrial Revolution" involving the rise of the machine in the workforce, and the latest company to lend credence to that claim is none other than Walmart, which is planning on cutting 7,000 jobs on account of automation. But the Walmart decision may be a bit more alarming for those in the workforce. As the Wall Street Journal reports (Warning: may be paywalled), the most concerning aspect of America's largest private employer might be that the eliminated positions are largely in the accounting and invoicing sectors of the company. These jobs are typically held by some of the longest tenured employees, who also happen to take home higher hourly wages. Now, those coveted positions are being automated. The Journal reports that beginning in 2017, much of this work will be addressed by "a central office or new money-counting 'cash recycler' machines in stores." Earlier this year, the company tested this change across some 500 locations. "We've seen many make smooth transitions during the pilot," said Deisha Barnett, a Walmart spokeswoman.

256 comments

  1. All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The sooner robots replace the workforce, the more leisure time we will have to enjoy life.

    1. Re:All according to plan by mark-t · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How will you pay for what you need to live without a job, exactly? Or do you think we'll be living in some idealistic world where everything, including housing, is free?

    2. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some people already believe that, as sad as that sounds.

    3. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. Enjoying life being homeless while the Waltons live in the lap of luxury.

    4. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      7000 jobs to Walmart is a rounding error.

      Their headcount is about 2,300,000 globally.
      The army of North Korea has 1,200,000 soldiers.

    5. Re:All according to plan by Bartles · · Score: 2

      How are the Waltons going to live in the lap of luxury if nobody has jobs or income to buy stuff from them, as you seem to think?

    6. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes. After society collapses, due to the destabilization caused by the majority of the population living in abject poverty. The survivors (if any), can choose any crumbling ruin they wish as their housing-- for free.

      And the rats you catch for dinner are always free.

    7. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Duh... they already do.

      Have you heard of mansions, compounds, private security? They fortify their shit and they can maintain that lifestyle for a while by siccing their little private armies on poor people. Enslave them to do whatever is left of farming/manufacturing and getting the goods back to them. If slaves die off it's just less mouths to feed with a portion of the harvest. And if they're enslaving people, raiding others for their goods is absolutely on the table too.

    8. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      guaranteed minimum income?

    9. Re:All according to plan by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You'd be looking at a complete paradigm shift when it comes to economies. That is to say, not communism, not capitalism, nor any other economic system of the past. Things like housing could very well become irrelevant, much as not everything you currently take for granted has always been relevant.

      For example: Why would you need to commute if there's no need for it? 200 years ago, nobody bothered; instead where they "worked" was less than an hour walk from where they lived. And since 90% of the population were farmers, there wasn't really even a concept of weekdays and weekends (Fun fact: That didn't truly begin until Henry Ford started the idea of taking Saturdays off and having an 8x5 40 hour work week to retain quality workers; a concept that many misattribute to labor unions.) Kind of like how school sessions are seasonal, work was also seasonal in those days, depending on your particular trade, and work was only done as it was necessary, rather than being done to make money as is the norm today.

      However the main thing that did (and still does) set apart the rich from the poor are material goods, which has for a long time been, and still is, a motivation for having an income. That is a constant that has always existed throughout history, and as time has gone by, and contrary to popular belief, the goalpost for "poor" keeps increasing. Kings of even 3 centuries ago could only dream of the things today's poor now have access to. Imagine for example how long it would have taken King George to travel from Edinburgh to London, and compare that to how long it takes for even a poor person to do the same today.

      But more to the point, if automation makes having material goods cheaper and cheaper, and if they eventually become free (who knows, maybe somebody will invent Star Trek style replicators?) then who needs to work? Work life would end up being like before the industrial revolution, where work is only done when it needs to be done, only now we have more nice things, but this time without the need for an income.

    10. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Post capitalism will have some form of universal income. It will need to otherwise capitalism will collapse. You can't have consumers without money. It will be those who grow the community best that will reap the most rewards, but everyone will share in the rewards. It's already starting to happen and will gradually continue forward.

    11. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't work, you starve. That's the problem

    12. Re:All according to plan by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      They are psychopaths, they do not care about everyone else's future just their own, in reality as far as they are concerned the entire would along with the rest of us can die when they die. They pay for the PR, they buy politicians to lie for them and they will happily kill the rest of us to get ahead, in fact many of them enjoy that more than getting ahead, the power to decide who lives and who dies is intoxicating to them, look at Hillary and Obama cheering themselves and each other along.

      It is far more accurately called psychopathic capitalism because that is the reality of it.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    13. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When all the essential stuff is automated, i.e., everything costs $0 or something very close to that to produce and sell, there won't be many jobs in the traditional sense. How would it make sense to sell all that stuff for anything much more than $0?
      You might think, "why should I let this robot give away the food that another robot harvested?"
      Well, what are the alternatives? Let it rot? Wait for people to take it anyway?

    14. Re:All according to plan by JustOK · · Score: 1

      minimum wage, guaranteed.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    15. Re:All according to plan by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Informative

      (Fun fact: That didn't truly begin until Henry Ford started the idea of taking Saturdays off and having an 8x5 40 hour work week to retain quality workers; a concept that many misattribute to labor unions.)

      I'm sorry, but you've got that wrong:

      In the United States, a few limited eight-hour-day laws were on the books shortly after the Civil War. One, in Illinois, was passed in 1867, followed in 1868 by a law covering certain classes of federal workers. But neither law was well-enforced, and in most sectors, working hours of 10 to 12 hours were common. So a reduction in the work week became a leading issue for the nascent labor movement.

      The issue came to a head in 1884, after the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions -- a predecessor of today’s AFL-CIO -- called for all workers to have eight-hour days by May 1, 1886. When that deadline wasn’t met, labor leaders upped the ante by calling for demonstrations. In Chicago, peaceful marches morphed into violence, with an explosion marring a rally at Haymarket Square on May 4, 1886, leaving seven police officers and four workers dead. Subsequent trials, executions and clemencies for the accused made the eight-hour week a top issue nationally and internationally.

      All of this occurred decades before Ford founded his company in 1903.

      Ford didn't implement the 40 hour workweek until 1926.

      http://www.politifact.com/trut...

      http://www.businessinsider.com...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    16. Re:All according to plan by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

      The army of North Korea has 1,200,000 soldiers.

      Yes, but do they carry the 80oz jar of pickles for under $5?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    17. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Maybe jars of kimchi? I'm sure your average NK soldier would sell his left nut for 5 USD...

    18. Re:All according to plan by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

      How will you pay for what you need to live without a job, exactly? Or do you think we'll be living in some idealistic world where everything, including housing, is free?

      If robots are doing all the work, what other alternative could there be?

    19. Re:All according to plan by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Coming eventually, but it seems a few dinosaurs are going to have to kick the bucket first. Sooner or later, politicians, boards, senior managers, shareholders, bankers and the like are going to have to accept lower returns. It is inevitable.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    20. Re:All according to plan by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      It will look like the Scandinavian model on steroids; much higher taxes, but in exchange people won't be starving to death.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    21. Re:All according to plan by Ziest · · Score: 5, Interesting

      guaranteed minimum income

      Never going to happen in this country. The status quo hangs on to their ideology like a junkie and his heroin. When the pitchforks come out then maybe, but I suspect the 1%, once they finish strip mining this country, will flee leaving us to rot.
       

      --
      Another day closer to redwood heaven
    22. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This does not detract from what you say, but I am a junkie that is abstaining currently. Hopefully I will keep up the trend.

      Point being, hope is free.

    23. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on historical events, such acceptance of lower returns won't come without war or revolution.

    24. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or not so much lower returns, but *long term* gains as opposed to immediate short-term ones that gut out the value of the company. The value of the company is the people and what they do.

    25. Re:All according to plan by Time_Ngler · · Score: 1

      People starve to death right now. Why should the future be any different, just because your ticket is up?

    26. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What's the alternative? What should be done when every available job requires such a high level of exceptional ability that only a couple of percent of the population have it? That is, when the only people who can outperform automated systems are those who are exceptionally intelligent, very talented as entertainers or have remarkable athletic capability. And the first category will keep shrinking when automation becomes more and more capable and the latter two cannot expect any remuneration either for what they do from the masses since the unemployed masses earn nothing. Really, what's your solution? To let nature run its course and wait and see whether the desperate masses manage to bring down the system or lose the battle against automated systems that are in place to keep the peace when people riot? If such automated systems do not have the authority to, if necessary, kill people or incarcerate them, those systems will lose but if they do, the masses will lose.

      Oh, and to which category do you think you belong? Those capable enough or those who become redundant? And I'd of course also like to know what you will do, if it turns out that you belong to the latter? Accept your fate?

    27. Re:All according to plan by Time_Ngler · · Score: 1

      There are people starving today, but no one bats an eyelash. The alternative chosen so far is to stop making food for people that can't afford to pay for it. Instead, we make robots to do things for the remaining people that can afford it. Why do you think this will change?

    28. Re:All according to plan by Time_Ngler · · Score: 1

      Do you, in all honesty, care about people that are starving today in other parts of the world? Why is it so different when your ticket is up?

    29. Re:All according to plan by RichPowers · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This benefits all shareholders, of which the Waltons are the largest.

      Do you own index or mutual funds in a 401(k) account to fund your retirement? If yes, the "blood" is on your hands, too. You proportionally benefit as much as the Waltons when jobs are cut and money is freed up for other purposes, including returning it to the people who own the enterprise.

      Anyone here a California public employee counting on a pension? How do you think CalPERS is going to achieve those rosy 7% returns to fund the payments to future retirees? Dividends, share repurchases, and growth from allocating retained earnings -- the shareholders own this money, after all -- in value-additive projects. Cutting the fat is one way of freeing up additional free cash for these purposes.

      I think it's interesting how millions of Americans are shareholders who benefit from these moves as much as the fat cats.

    30. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      trollific if only anything about leisure was true unfortunately all this means is that the people already depending on the cheapness of waly world will be not able to afford even that.

    31. Re:All according to plan by mark-t · · Score: 0

      A majority of the population living in abject poverty will not economically destabilize the entire nation because a vast majority of the population does not collectively control most of the wealth of the country.

    32. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sooner robots replace the workforce, the more leisure time we will have to enjoy life.

      WOOSH... that was the sound of the sarcasm going RIGHT over people's heads. I thought people who frequented slashdot used to be... taller.

      I'd like to add that one glorious day, Walmart will replace ALL its workers with robots and/or 'automation,' then slowly their lower management, then middle management, then the people who maintain and repair the robots or automata will slowly be replaced by even more sophisticated ones, and then upper management, the board of directors, and the CEO will be replaced by machines of one sort or another.

      Then finally, the glorious day will come when such artificial beings will replace Walmart's CUSTOMERS, taking human beings completely out of the loop, Eventually, no humans will be required or even desired in most businesses, and then... ...we all slowly drift off and die, or fade away, etc.

    33. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sooner robots replace the workforce, the more leisure time we will have to enjoy life.

      How will you pay for what you need to live without a job, exactly? Or do you think we'll be living in some idealistic world where everything, including housing, is free?

      WOOSH... that was the sound of the sarcasm going RIGHT over people's heads. I thought people who frequented slashdot used to be... taller.

    34. Re:All according to plan by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In some ways the goalposts have moved but not in a simple linear progression. Because of technology, the poor can have cheap TVs and phones. But in trade, they now cannot afford a place to call home. If they tried the popular solution from the middle ages of pick out an un-occupied spot and build a house, the city would come arrest them and bulldoze the place. They can no-longer make a job for themselves by planting on the commons and selling whatever surplus they grow (In many places, you are not even permitted to plant crops on the land you own).

      An income is no longer optional, but the ability to have an income is not guaranteed.

      As has always been the case, the nobility doesn't trouble itself with these things.

    35. Re: All according to plan by saloomy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The reason your doom and gloom is wrong is specifically that the economy doesn't shrink. It grows. Yes, automation reduces positions in the economy for work by people, but every person not working is his or her salary in terms of cost not invited to produce goods and services. So the price falls, so the affordability rises. The rising affordability means that everyone will have more. The reason the economy rises is that the AVERAGE person has more ability to consume than prior. And no, not just the 1%, the ordinary individual. It makes no sense in being able to make a million cars automatically if only 500 people can afford them. The more for less economy only works if more people can have more stuff for less. High unemployment is not a natural state, people will always find work, and be able to afford more with it. The 1% will make sure that people have propensity to consume. It's the natural order, and they have to have people buying their shit or they will no longer be in the 1%. Maybe most individuals will eventually own stock in the infradtructure.

    36. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      guaranteed minimum income

      Never going to happen in this country. The status quo hangs on to their ideology like a junkie and his heroin. When the pitchforks come out then maybe, but I suspect the 1%, once they finish strip mining this country, will flee leaving us to rot.

      This is an overly simplistic view, my friend. They strip-mine WHILE owning property and businesses in our nation, AND in other countries as a hedge. When one country suddenly goes to shit, they pick up and find themselves in some OTHER house of theirs, and if needs-be, they renounce their citizenship, and live as citizens or subjects, or whatever, of wherever they end up, while still keeping most, if not all of the same benefits they had in the US, but while still holding onto all the money they ripped-off from good, honest, hard work, etc.

    37. Re:All according to plan by Mr.+Shotgun · · Score: 4, Funny

      but I suspect the 1%, once they finish strip mining this country, will flee leaving us to rot.

      So what you're saying is when the revolution comes invest in anti-aircraft missiles?

      --
      Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
    38. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > The reason your doom and gloom is wrong is specifically that the economy doesn't shrink. It grows.

      No, it isn't some law of nature that the economy inexorably grows.

    39. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have no choice, actually: accept your fate or... Accept your fate. There is really nothing you can do. It's out of your hands.

    40. Re:All according to plan by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      I suspect the 1%, once they finish strip mining this country, will flee leaving us to rot.

      I thought the 1% were already trying to close the strip mines, and leave the coal miners to rot.

    41. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is the original poster something like 8 years old? The economy has shrunk many times during my life time. The worst in 2000-2008 under GW and Darth Vader.

    42. Re:All according to plan by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Not so true on the day of rest. Ancient china had 1 day in 5 to rest and it was changed (I think during the Han dynasty) to 1 day in 10 to rest. That was over 2000 years ago.

      I mostly agree that work was seasonal (including night work under a full moon).

      The more likely short term scenario (20 years) is high unemployment while products are still not free. Worse, prices on those items will be based on what the richest people able to buy them make. We do a LOT of that now (recent epi pen scandal but also disney pricing and movies). Prices are what the market will bear-- not what is a good profit.

      Longer term? It could lead to a nice post capitalist society but it's likely to be very ugly getting there because we are pretty close to many cheap non-renewables becoming expensive as we use as much each year as we did a century ago and as population and living standards live consumption has the potential to rise another order of magnitude in less than a decade.

      MIT non political guys estimated (pretty accurately) back in 1978 that we would run thru all the material on earth (not just easy to mine) by 2050 to 2100. So that means a sudden halt to stainless steel and lower crop yields (no cheap pesticides and no cheap fertilizers). We might finesse the crop issue with GMO and maybe robots that tend the plants constantly. But we can't finess the chromium, magnesium, molybdenum, etc. issue.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    43. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One day you will own one or more of these Robots and they will work for you. That's how.

    44. Re: All according to plan by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually for almost 80% of the population, you are wrong.

      Ability to afford a new car, a new house, a college education, high quality clothing, high quality food has been falling since 1980.

      The top 20% are doing fine.

      Having a smart phone doesn't make up for eating poorly (lotsa cheap carbs- no nutrients), being unable to get decent housing ($160,000 even 25 miles from town try buying that on $35k a year after taxes), or decent clothing (cheap knits that shred in a few years-- if that long).

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    45. Re:All according to plan by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 2

      No one starves to death in Scandinavia, unless they deliberately starve themselves. And even then, they'll probably be put in a psychiatric ward and force-fed or drip-fed.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    46. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The poster has a really good point. Products will be prived where people can afford them, no matter what. Even if 100% of the population lived on welfare, the vslue of the dollar woild deflate accordingly until the average days wage was equal in proportion to the price of a coffee as it is currently.

    47. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It makes no sense in being able to make a million cars automatically if only 500 people can afford them.

      It makes perfect sense, if those 500 people want 20,000 cars each. Or, more likely, an assortment of yachts, private jets, or whatevs else could be auto-made.

    48. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the way I see it, you have three options. Either you give people free money, you create a bunch of completely worthless jobs nobody needs done, or you apply the final solution.

      This genie is out of the bottle and you can't put it back.

    49. Re:All according to plan by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

      Read the short story "Manna" (free book). In the story, most countries evolve into a somewhat dystopian jobless society. People get a minimum income, most of that being provided in kind: government housing with free TV and a cafeteria serving palatable food. But no hopes of ever doing better, no opportunities for other activities of leisure, and after a while you can imagine those benefits will get cut: less meal choices, singles will now have to share their room. And you are not allowed to leave the compound anymore either.

      It all comes down to the question Marx posed: who owns the means of production? Who owns the robots? That may well gravitate to private owners, while governments increasingly struggle to balance their budget and provide for a growing number of unemployed, while income from natural resources is running out fast. And then what? You'd kind of hope the megacorps will go under with us since they'd have no one left to sell to. But even if we end up owning the robots collectively, you're still likely to end up with a centrally planned, communist society, nominally designed for efficiency rather than comfort, like the world in "This Perfect Day"

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    50. Re:All according to plan by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      But as we all know, the rats you catch for dinner are only free if your time has no value.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    51. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No jobs, no work.

      No work, no wage, minimum or otherwise.

    52. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No one starves in America, have you looked at Americans lately? If the typical American starved to death, they would end up much healthier because they would even out to being normal weight. On average, Americans eat about 1.5 to 4 times what they need to be healthy.

      On the other hand, a lot of American obesity in the poor is credited to the relative price of healthy food versus the price of junk food for them.

    53. Re: All according to plan by turbidostato · · Score: 5, Informative

      "The reason the economy rises is that the AVERAGE person has more ability to consume than prior."

      You know that thingie called statistics. If I have one million in the bank and the other nine have zero, we all AVERAGE 100K in the bank. Still no good for those other nine.

      "people will always find work"

      What's that? the fifth law of thermodinamics, or something?

      No, man, sorry: for most of History, people was absolutely unable to find work and it was more that a short elite forced them into work. What if that short elite has no work for them anymore?

      "The 1% will make sure that people have propensity to consume. It's the natural order"

      Again, have you ever opened a History book? Was a consumist society the "natural order" of ancient Egipt, or Greece, or Rome, or Middle Ages, or pre-revolution Europe? Was it the "natural order" along imperial Chine, traditional Japan, most Africa history or precolombine America?

      Looking at the History book, it seems much more that your "natural order", if any, is for an elite taking benefit of most of the goodies squeezed out of a mass of people let just above the starving level. What if that elite manages not to need that mass of people to squeeze their goodies anymore?

    54. Re:All according to plan by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "Post capitalism will have some form of universal income. It will need to otherwise capitalism will collapse."

      A "post capitalist" society is, by its very definition, one where capitalism has already collapsed so, no, no need for some form of universal income.

    55. Re:All according to plan by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Nobody starves to death in the US either. When they talk about people "having hunger" the standard is exactly that - being involuntarily hungry at least once that year.

    56. Re: All according to plan by finlan · · Score: 2

      Why eat rats when you can eat a banker?

    57. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The answer is obvious, massive amounts of warfare. Everyone will be like North Korea, except they'll act on their threats because there won't be any food shipments.

    58. Re: All according to plan by meyekul · · Score: 1

      Some people already live that...

    59. Re: All according to plan by coastwalker · · Score: 1

      This growing economy is presumably why the middle class and working population of America have seen no benefit from improvements in productivity since the early 1970s. http://www.epi.org/productivit... What you are missing about the 1% is that their wealth will logically move where the growth is - and that is not the USA, it is the Far East, Africa, China and other recently third world countries. You are very silly if you think the 1% are interested in investing in the American workforce whilst better returns are available elsewhere. Try looking at what has actually happened rather than some pie in the sky theory.

      --
      Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
    60. Re:All according to plan by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      The sooner robots replace the workforce, the more leisure time we will have to enjoy life.

      Maybe for those who own the robots. I can't imagine the money I make from my robots going to pay your rent. That would seem un-American.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    61. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We already have examples that counter this, societies can live in poverty for centuries. We might see some new religions popping up, but I don't think we'll see a meaningful destabilization.

    62. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With money from a job that isn't a boring admin position at Walmart.

    63. Re:All according to plan by secretsquirel · · Score: 1

      I'm just gonna hack into everyone else's robots.

    64. Re:All according to plan by shentino · · Score: 1

      That only works if the people collecting the savings spread their wealth around and allow us blue collar stiffs to actually take a break without leaving food off our table.

    65. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why eat rats when you can eat a banker?

      Rats taste better?

    66. Re: All according to plan by lroylw · · Score: 0

      Dear God, you Libertarians crack me up.

    67. Re:All according to plan by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      Is it not priced like that where you live?

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    68. Re:All according to plan by Chelloveck · · Score: 1

      guaranteed minimum income

      Never going to happen in this country. The status quo hangs on to their ideology like a junkie and his heroin. When the pitchforks come out then maybe, but I suspect the 1%, once they finish strip mining this country, will flee leaving us to rot.

      I'm a huge proponent of some sort of basic income solution, but I fear you're right. And it's not just the 1% who oppose it. There are a lot of working-class people who have a visceral opposition to "freeloaders" sponging off of their hard work. It doesn't matter if you can show that such a system makes sense, it feels wrong to a heck of a lot of people.

      Someday automation is going to be capable of doing most unskilled labor, and quite a bit of skilled labor as well. At some point we're either going to have to admit that there's not enough work for everyone but that's okay, there's plenty of wealth to go around. Or we're going to have to do dumb-ass things like forbidding certain types of automation from doing certain types of work, just to have an excuse to keep people "working".

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    69. Re: All according to plan by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "he answer is obvious, massive amounts of warfare"

      Yes. To some extent, it's already happening now; you just need to look at big cities with large inequalities, say -now that the Olympics are still recent, Rio. There's a warfare situation there, it's only that, quite against the desires and hopes of the naive liberals here, is not poor people against elites ala French revolution but among the destituted themselves within their favelas, while the elites are living la dolce vita mostly within their militarily isolated zones.

      And that's now. Just imagine in some few decades, with those elites allowed to use robotized machine-guns and armed drones to defend themselves.

    70. Re:All according to plan by Cito · · Score: 1

      A "Star Trek" type communist world without the liberal political correctness does sound awesome where all necessities are free. Course they have "replicators", but one if the books mentioned how money was done away with once people realized a faith based currency was meaningless. Now with that said I know "Utopian" society always falls apart.

      Multiculturalism always fails and has in every society on Earth.

      But here's done Utopian communist examples from an episode of Star Trek excerpt: https://youtu.be/pzqW0YaN2ho

      Heres the Democratic Co-Director of liberal think tank "Institute for public policy " discussing how back in 2005 at a dinner secretly taped how to destroy America by using multiculturalism , a completely made up word by political correctness just as the word racist never existed in language until the inventor of political correctness as a weapon Richard Henry Pratt created the word in 1902 for Indian youth to attack older Indian generation as he erased 100s of languages and cultures via political correctness dubbed the largest cultural genocide.
      http://www.npr.org/sections/co...

      So star trek world would be cool, it only works in fiction :-P

    71. Re:All according to plan by I75BJC · · Score: 1

      Did you really miss the Humor in the post? This is /. where humor, particularly sarcasm and cynicism prevail. Please Lighten Up!

    72. Re:All according to plan by I75BJC · · Score: 1

      Those "some people" are Democrats, right?

    73. Re:All according to plan by Cito · · Score: 1

      I forgot to put Richard Lamm's 2005 leaked speech at liberal think-tank event

      https://youtu.be/nFAQNjqH1zA

    74. Re: All according to plan by I75BJC · · Score: 1

      And those "some people" are Democrats too, right?

    75. Re:All according to plan by I75BJC · · Score: 1

      Please don't confuse a /.-er with the facts, dude.

    76. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In pre-colombine America we didn't worry so much about mass shootings. It was a turning point for sure.

    77. Re:All according to plan by mbone · · Score: 1

      Why do you think this will change?

      Stein's law:

      "If something can't go on forever, it will stop."

    78. Re:All according to plan by Bengie · · Score: 1

      Robot time is not values, only human time is. As humans get removed from the cost of producing stuff, stuff will get cheaper. It's the transition that hurts. At some point in the far future, almost everyone will be unemployed. One of two extreme things will happen. 1) Everything will work out fine 2) Everything will go horribly horribly wrong destroying society

      During this transition people getting laid off are getting the worst of both worlds, still needing money while having difficulty finding work. As we get further along, acquiring money while unemployed will become easier otherwise crime will rise as people get desperate. The only thing more expensive than welfare is sticking people in jail/prison for crime. Not will all of these people in prison cost large amounts of money, but also create negative value, reducing the value of money, causing greater inflation.

    79. Re: All according to plan by Bengie · · Score: 1

      The value of money is driven by the typical person's ability to spend it. If 9 out of 10 people have 0 dollars, then the $1mil the 1 person has is worthless.

    80. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess this means Walmart can defend our "food" supply.

    81. Re: All according to plan by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 1

      So, since Jimmy Carter was in office.

      Good to know.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    82. Re:All according to plan by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      How will you pay for what you need to live without a job, exactly? Or do you think we'll be living in some idealistic world where everything, including housing, is free?

      If robots are doing all the work, what other alternative could there be?

      Camouflage?

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    83. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The reason the economy rises is that the AVERAGE person has more ability to consume than prior."

      You know that thingie called statistics. If I have one million in the bank and the other nine have zero, we all AVERAGE 100K in the bank. Still no good for those other nine.

      If you have one million in the bank, and the other nine have zero, you are not the "average person."

    84. Re:All according to plan by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

      When they talk about people "having hunger" the standard is exactly that - being involuntarily hungry at least once that year.

      Note that the standard in the USA for "hunger" is "missed a meal". By that definition, I have been suffering from hunger every year of my life, since I manage to be busy enough with something to miss a meal at least once a year....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    85. Re:All according to plan by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      guaranteed minimum income

      Never going to happen in this country. The status quo hangs on to their ideology like a junkie and his heroin. When the pitchforks come out then maybe, but I suspect the 1%, once they finish strip mining this country, will flee leaving us to rot.

      Perhaps it's because people often try holding out for the best deal rather than accepting a reasonable deal, and I mean on both sides of the equation. Some of that is greed or competitiveness, but some is probably due to uncertainty about the future, so companies/people focus on the now.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    86. Re: All according to plan by Traxton · · Score: 2

      Not where I live (Sweden). Here, a meal at McDonald's is 70 SEK. A nutritious meal of chicken fillet, rice and broccoli cooked at home is 20-30 SEK. No dollar menu available anywhere.

    87. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, most Americans barely benefit from this because the tiny bump in stock price is heavily outweighed by the societal costs of all these newly unemployed. Costs that the Waltons get to dodge through their elaborate tax sheltering schemes.

    88. Re:All according to plan by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      I'm a huge proponent of some sort of basic income solution, but I fear you're right. And it's not just the 1% who oppose it. There are a lot of working-class people who have a visceral opposition to "freeloaders" sponging off of their hard work. It doesn't matter if you can show that such a system makes sense, it feels wrong to a heck of a lot of people.

      My mother, who is *not* in the 1%, is like that. She's in her 70s and doesn't want to pay any taxes anymore because of all the freeloaders -- she watches a LOT of Fox News. She relents a bit when I remind her that taxes also pay for the Police, Fire Department, road crews, etc... Still, she bitches about Obamacare, even though she's on Medicare and my step-father is on Tricare (retired Air Force and Navy). They enjoy (if that's the right word) their single-payer health care, while begrudging me any attempt at the same.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    89. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paying people for busy-work is plainly stupid. Labor automation is a rational thing to do. It makes perfect fucking sense. I find absolutely zero rationality in any argument ever put forward that we should abstain from the use of modern technology, and should pay people to do needless menial tasks instead. That would be utterly absurd.

      So, cut the jobs. It is the right thing to do.

      Once we have moved past that issue, THEN we can start having a rational discussion about the labor market and income distribution, and what should be done about very high levels of unemployment among people for whom we can easily provide the basic necessities but from whom we cannot extract useful labor. There will be MANY voices in that conversation, of course, and then end result probably won't make our civilization out to be a paragon of justice and compassion. But it will work out in the end.

    90. Re:All according to plan by HanzoSpam · · Score: 1

      Remember back in the 60s we were told that by 2000 we'd be working a 20 hours a week? It kinda worked out. Now half the population doesn't work at all, and the other half works 60 hours a week to support them.

      --

      Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
    91. Re: All according to plan by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
      Multiculturalism doesn't always fail. Look across your northern border, where English and French cultures built a country that is still admitting other cultures (such as 35,000 Syrian refugees in half a year while Texas is taking the feds to court over being allocated 6 because all their guns still don't make them feel safe).

      What are you going to do now that there are more Latino babies being born than white kids? If you insist that multiculturalism has no place, better get ready for the US to become a country where the Latino culture is the only culture

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    92. Re:All according to plan by HanzoSpam · · Score: 1

      What will be the incentive to produce stuff, even in an automated fashion, if nobody is going to be paying for it? Are people going to be producing stuff just for jollies?

      --

      Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
    93. Re:All according to plan by HanzoSpam · · Score: 1

      They are psychopaths, they do not care about everyone else's future just their own

      Right. As if you're losing any sleep worrying about their problems.

      in reality as far as they are concerned the entire would along with the rest of us can die when they die.

      And I'm having a hard time seeing exactly where they're wrong about that. Care to enlighten us?

      --

      Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
    94. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also watch Humans Need Not Apply by CGP Grey. Not future predicting, just what's here or very near term.

    95. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think you mean since around the time Reagan cut taxes in 1981. Can't expect him to have perfect recall of the times but most economists who actually look at the disconnect can typically link it to Reagan spreading his voodoo economics which we continue to live and while it continues to do damage to this day.

    96. Re: All according to plan by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Close! Since reagan took office (I know.. I voted for him before I realized he wasn't a fiscal conservative).

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    97. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because your dad probably thinks you're a pussy for not joining the Navy.

    98. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, I agree with you, but here's the problem as I see it.
      All of that automation is the result of investment by "equity" (by which I mean business owners, what Marx would call capital). Equity therefore believes, not irrationally, that they should reap the benefits of that automation. Otherwise, why invest?
      The problem seems to me to revolve around who OWNS the robots.

    99. Re: All according to plan by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1, Informative

      Exactly but to be fair (which many never are) the problem is larger than reagan.

      Sure cutting taxes and not cutting spending was foolish by Reagan (the president of guns AND butter!).

      But, global manufacturing played a large part as our wages finally came under pressure after an incredible holiday after world war II where most of the rest of the world was destroyed. As other workers around the world at lower wages gained higher skill wages were suppressed.

      The artificial part is at the high end. We need a better balanced economy because killing off lower wage workers employment kills the economy from the bottom up. Fewer TV's sold, fewer cars sold, less money available for any kind of low end luxury.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    100. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't provide minimum income with illegal aliens flooding into your country. California alone wastes 21 billion on illegals for basic services.

    101. Re: All according to plan by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      My wife used to squeeze my goodies all the time but now we're separated.

    102. Re:All according to plan by Sperbels · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, a lot of American obesity in the poor is credited to the relative price of healthy food versus the price of junk food for them.

      Making a bag of potato chips cheaper than a salad doesn't mean the salad is expensive, it just means the potato chips are cheap.

    103. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct, precolumbine Americans didn't have firearms.

    104. Re:All according to plan by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Multiculturalism always fails and has in every society on Earth.

      Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Every succesful society on Earth thus far from the Roman Empire to the United States has been multicultural, simply because being a succesful society involves more people and geographic area than it's possible to keep monocultural.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    105. Re:All according to plan by ultranova · · Score: 1

      No one starves to death in Scandinavia, unless they deliberately starve themselves.

      At least here in Finland the welfare state is being dismantled for the sake of right-wing ideology. So we're going in the exact wrong direction, if a non-dystopian automated future is the goal.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    106. Re: All according to plan by thundercattt · · Score: 1

      That's where the right to a basic guaranteed income comes into play. Robots do it all, you just lay in the hammock collecting your cheque.

    107. Re:All according to plan by ultranova · · Score: 1

      When the pitchforks come out then maybe, but I suspect the 1%, once they finish strip mining this country, will flee leaving us to rot.

      Pitchforks are hardly a match for Terminators. Security can be automated, just like everything else.

      Of course, everyone but the plutocrats dying off is also a possible outcome.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    108. Re:All according to plan by Wootery · · Score: 1

      You realize Walmart doesn't pay wages to people they cut, right?

    109. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "However the main thing that did (and still does) set apart the rich from the poor are material goods,"

      I'd say it's Real Estate. It's in the name.

    110. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do you, in all honesty, care about people that are starving today in other parts of the world? Why is it so different when your ticket is up?

      The ones in other parts of the world? No.

      The ones in that dark alley I have to walk thru on my way home? Yes. I would definitely prefer that they are not desperate enough to find the risk of attacking me for whatever I have to be worthwhile.

      When I am hungry and homeless, you better damn well care... I will invade your home/business and take whatever I can to feed and shelter myself.

      Never forget: we are mostly made of meat.

    111. Re:All according to plan by Time_Ngler · · Score: 1

      Yea, of course, but why would it stop now or in the immediate future? Why can't this process continue until the entire economy is devoted to keeping a few people happy, with disregard to everyone else, even to the point of their destruction? What will prevent this?

    112. Re: All according to plan by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "If 9 out of 10 people have 0 dollars, then the $1mil the 1 person has is worthless."

      For most of History that's been the case and still the one million dollar man was rich. For a matter of fact, if just only one out of ten had any money at all, it means there would be about seven hundred millions of millionaires in the world, about twice USA population. More than enough to:
      a) Give a damn about the other 6.300 million people.
      b) Produce enough of an army to reduce the other 6.300 million people to asses if they dare to fight, not among them but against the favored ones.

      Now, statistics again: would you want to bet on your odds of being the one in ten instead of among the nine?

    113. Re:All according to plan by Time_Ngler · · Score: 1

      Oh, the whole tough guy persona is going to beat down the progress of technology. I'm afraid... so very afraid *rolls eyes*

      You try that once nowadays, you'll have to deal with electronic alarms, your every move recorded, and a police force with the technology to track you down no matter what bridge you try to hide under, and you'll end up in a jail cell, crippled, or dead.

      Your threats are meaningless to the institution.

    114. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No actually it has been the last 8 years under the Muslim Communist Kenyan "Community Organizer".

    115. Re:All according to plan by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Robot time is not values, only human time is. As humans get removed from the cost of producing stuff, stuff will get cheaper

      Uh... no. most people don't price products based on what it costs them to make, they price them according to what they believe people will pay. If they don't think they can make a profit on how much they think people will pay, then they won't make the product in the first place. People who altruistically try to always pass on their cost savings to the consumer without doing some hard research to substantiate that it will result in a greater net profit for themselves are people who run businesses that fail.

    116. Re:All according to plan by jaymemaurice · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the solution here is to better automate the prison system...

      --
      120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
    117. Re:All according to plan by jaymemaurice · · Score: 1

      I always pictured AC's point to be the /real/ zombie apocalypse. Perhaps there will be mass civil unrest before technology can be truly useful or sustaining. I mean mass surveillance will only work as long as the masses can afford electricity and perhaps we may find an more immediate future where economic collapse is more sudden than the social systems can support.

      --
      120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
    118. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is BS. In my country (central Europe), houses cost around the same, people earn only a fraction of what you mention, energies are costlier, yet they still manage to buy the houses.

    119. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does everybody believe that all the machines doing the automation belong to everyone (hence the basic income) and forget that machines need to be developed, maintained etc., which means someone must be investing in them?

    120. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If nobody works, who develops and maintains the robots? What would their incentive be, if they can do just fine without working?

    121. Re: All according to plan by Bengie · · Score: 1

      You're missing it. In history, if someone had "$1mil" it was in gold or silver or something actually worth something. That does not hold true anymore. In this context being discussed, someone with $1mil "in the bank" just means someone that has the number 1,000,000 strored in a database somewhere or possibly a bunch of worthless pieces of paper with $100 printed on them..

    122. Re: All according to plan by Reziac · · Score: 1

      "Eat the rich. The poor are tough and stringy."

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    123. Re: All according to plan by P-niiice · · Score: 1

      Won't work out that way though. It'll just mean fewer jobs and a huge need for welfare and healthcare for the unemployed... And higher profits of course.

    124. Re:All according to plan by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      That could be the case in a paradigm shift that I described above. Though not quite in those terms.

      Consider the present status quo for people with >400k/year incomes: When they move to a new location, they typically don't care about the house, rather they just care about the location. It's basically a gimme that when they move somewhere, they bulldoze the house and build one the way they'd like it built.

      Now, if everything is automatic, then presumably building houses to the owners specification could be automated as well, therefore meaning it's also done cheaper. Think like building a sand castle, only in this case you're building a real house from nothing more than the land you own (imagine for example, a 3d printer that grinds up rocks on your land and builds them into a cement foundation, walls, roof, etc.) So even people with low incomes could shift from buying a house that they want to buying the land that they want, just like rich people today (remember that similar things thought out of reach for the poor have become commonplace, like car phones for example -- now the poor have cell phones, which are much better than car phones.)

      However one thing that will always be in finite supply is the land itself. So it could be that what separates rich from poor is not how much money you have, and not material goods (if we're fully automated, you can have any material good you want.) This means the car you drive or size of your house is notwithstanding because anybody can automatically create any car or any house to their exact liking. Instead what separates rich from poor is simply where you live, and nothing else. Think how living in New York or San Francisco is in higher demand than living in other places. At the end of the day, land would be land, but it becomes more about what scenery you desire and/or who you live next to. If you desire beachfront property, maybe we can automate the creation of pacific islands? Dubai has created islands off of its shores for extra beach front housing, perhaps a more advanced version of the same could be a thing in the future.

    125. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Access to cheap goods is not what matters. Access to natural resources, land, water, etc, that's what really counts, because in the end, you can not eat your car or drink your iphone. And all off these resources become everyday more expensive and out of reach of the masses. Everyday more land becomes owned by fewer rich people. As they control all the natural resources, they will raise the prices of food. They will sell you a bottle of water the price they want. You wont stand a chance to collect water or to produce your own energy because they will pass bills to explicitly forbid you to do so (as they did in Spain). It's not about having, it's all about controlling.

    126. Re:All according to plan by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Everyday more land becomes owned by fewer rich people.

      The land has always been owned by the rich and powerful. The notion that regular working people could own land is a rather recent development in history.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    127. Re:All according to plan by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It's actually quite likely to happen, precisely because it has proponents on both left and right. Left is self-explanatory, but on the right, there are many people who recognize that some form of welfare is necessary, but want to keep it as low-overhead in terms of government bureaucracy as possible. UBI does just that.

    128. Re:All according to plan by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      You'd be looking at a complete paradigm shift when it comes to economies. That is to say, not communism, not capitalism, nor any other economic system of the past.

      Actually, it would be an economic system described in the past, just never actually implemented - namely, communism. To remind, USSR and other "communist" countries never actually claimed to be communist. They said that they were socialist (debatable), and were progressing on the way to communism (ha!). The latter never happened, but as a hypothetical economic system, it's basically what you naturally get once you're post-scarcity or close to it for living essentials. Which is exactly where we're heading with automation. Marxism was all about how you couldn't ever get to communism without socialism, but that theory did not survive practical testing.

    129. Re: All according to plan by turbidostato · · Score: 1

      "You're missing it. In history, if someone had "$1mil" it was in gold or silver or something actually worth something."

      Because gold holds any intrinsic value but the one that people exchanging it want to consider, yes.

      "someone with $1mil "in the bank" just means someone that has the number 1,000,000 strored in a database somewhere or possibly a bunch of worthless pieces of paper with $100 printed on them.."

      As long as someone wants to give value to those pieces of paper, or those registries in a database, they hold as much real value as it has any amount of gold. Did you read my previous message, like the part of there being 700 million people wanting to give value to them?

      You think that because money is a fiat currency it also happened by fiat. You'd better open a Economic History book -heck, even The Wealth of Nations would be good enough to start with, to try to understand what money is or isn't or why money looks the way it looks and -specifically, why there's no big difference using gold, paper or ones are zeroes in a database to that respect.

    130. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just die.

    131. Re: All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a fool my friend. I gotta get you the cartoon video about this

    132. Re:All according to plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well take your bitch ass to the military, you will have "free" tricare also. Fools like you ignore THE PRICE/WORK OTHER PEOPLE PAID FOR THEIR BENEFITS.

      You just see the word "benefits" and think asshats who get stuff WITHOUT WORK are "freeloaders" instead of fuckin FREELOADERS.

    133. Re: All according to plan by GaryHayman · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean GW and Starscream?

  2. The pain train is coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Automation: Taking all the lower to middle class jobs (soon to be upper middle class jobs like lawyers/doctors).
    Illegals: Taking all the lower class jobs
    Insourcing: Taking all the lower to middle class jobs
    Outsourcing: Taking all the middle class jobs

    Face it, if you're not making millions because you were born rich and/or know the right people, you can and will be replaced by one of these methods soon enough.

    Save your money. Diversify. Prepare for a forced early retirement.

    1. Re:The pain train is coming by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      As it always has been. As it always will be.

      Or are we lamenting over the fact that accountants don't have to add by hand anymore as well?

    2. Re:The pain train is coming by NEDHead · · Score: 1

      DAMN THE ABACUS!

    3. Re:The pain train is coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >labor has always been worthless
      Get over yourself. There's always been something a healthy 18yo set of limbs could do to pay for the hyperspecialization edu we now believe is everyone's "duty". Until now.

      Well, actually, no. We haven't progressed ditch digging into extinction just yet. But give it another century or two and that earnest, hardworking kid is ready to do... nothing. There's nothing he can do that we'd be willing to pay for. The burger flipping is automated.

      Now: Prolekistan is still capable of exporting labor to continue importing food/shelter.
      Then: Prolekistan has nothing to export except rounding-error drips of art and blowjobs. We all know what happens to countries with nothing to export.

    4. Re:The pain train is coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well not quite, the sex trade will likely be the very last thing automation kills. The young, hardworking kid (16 or 18 depending on the state) will have to be ready to do that.

    5. Re:The pain train is coming by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      There's always something. Just like there always has been. I could train a 16 year old to do 80% of my job. It doesn't mean I'd be out of a job it means I'd get to work on the other 20%.

      We survived combines and tractors in the field, we survived having to dig coal and minerals by hand we'll survive something automating TPS reports.

    6. Re:The pain train is coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is great for the tiny fraction of us who will get to offer the megaelitecorp families blowjobs.

      But their insane wealth is always, even now, underestimated. They can't get the money down. The rich (this doesn't mean you, "i have seven figures and a timeshare") could have 24/7 nonstop blowjobs and caviar and it wouldn't even show up on radar.

      Wanna know what your descendants need to be ready to do?

      Kill. Other starving plebs, I mean. Obviously not the city-mansion with the armies of killbot sentries.

    7. Re:The pain train is coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      60 years ago computer was a job title...

  3. shades of The Twilight Zone by davidwr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There are many bromides applicable here ... too much of a good thing, tiger by the tail, as you sow so shall you reap. The point is that too often Man becomes clever instead of becoming wise, he becomes inventive and not thoughtful, and sometimes, as in the case of Mr. Whipple, he can create himself right out of existence. As in tonight's tale of oddness and obsolescence in the Twilight Zone.

    closing narration, The Brain Center at Whipple's

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:shades of The Twilight Zone by istartedi · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, replacing Brawndo with water crashed the economy in Idiocracy--until they realized it would save them. My analogy breaks down though because we don't know what sweet clear water there is to replace the monotony of a white collar mid-level position. We just know they're going away. Maybe these people can rediscover the joys of subsistence farming or something, and start watering their crops with Mt. Dew.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  4. Our great country by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 1

    The sooner robots replace the workforce, the more leisure time we will have to enjoy life.

    Uh... no.

    The measure of the US is its economy. So long as the corporations are making ever more profit, so long as GDP is on the rise, then we're doing great and nothing needs to be changed.

    The people's needs count for nothing, it's the corporations and only the corporations that make our country great!

    1. Re:Our great country by lgw · · Score: 1

      GDP is dominated by consumer spending. It doesn't measure profits, and has nothing to do with profits. GDP is only "on the rise" if people are buying stuff. In some hallucinatory economy where automated factories were spitting out consumer good that no one could buy, then sure, the most naÃve way GDP is measured could suggest it's healthy (but then, how do you value goods on one buys?), but most would say the GDP was collapsing if none of that production was part of the economy.

      The GDP is the people's needs, to the extent those needs are fulfilled (well, including stuff the government buys, like defense spending and roads).

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Our great country by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      GDP is a measure of production. While it is true that there is significant influence from consumer spending, that isn't the only way GDP is affected, and most certainly the exchange of services also plays its part.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:Our great country by lgw · · Score: 1

      GDP doesn't exactly track "sum of all income", but it's always close, and if it wanders too far off economists will question the metric (some just use income as the measure directly - Wikipedia goes into depth on this).

      By an odd coincidence, the sum of the value of all publicly traded stock also stays close to the GDP. I'm not sure why that is, or if it's temporary, but for the past few decades it's been a reliable indicator of stock market bubbles. It's also a good sign that money that goes to capital is reasonable compared to the money that goes to labor (you can buy all future profits for one year's labor).

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  5. Not really by eclectro · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Everything is not rosy with Walmart's penchant to do away with workers. One thing is an exploding crime problem at their stores because there is not enough personnel around. Who wants to go shopping in a crime zone? That and a popular local Walmart has an extremely hard time keeping the store shelves stocked. It's wonderful to have low prices, but I usually am wasting my time going there only to see empty shelves.

    So disposing of workers only goes so far. I simply do not believe that our android workers will arrive in the near future to mitigate these problems created by lack of workers.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    1. Re:Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The whole sector is down. Macys, Sears, Target, BB, Walmart, etc ALL of them are down. You will see major cutbacks across the board. Who knew only people working in service who cant afford stuff doesnt work?! Maybe if we just raise min wage and make more service jobs it will be awesome!

      The strata of the American classes
      Poverty. These people live under bridges. Quite a large number of people here have some sort of health issue.
      Welfare. These people live with section 8 and have some sort of help. They are not living a great lifestyle but they get by. They live in a crap apartment.
      Working-Welfare. These people are trying to get out of welfare but are borderline. They probably would be better off on welfare. They probably have 2-3 jobs. They live in a crap apartment.
      Working lower class. They are getting by but not very well. They are 1 paycheck away from being under a bridge. Both breadwinners in the family probably work. They live in a small home or apartment. Not awful but not great.
      Middle class. Their jobs are being exported as fast as they can by multinational companies that take advantage of death taxes. They are one hospital trip from losing everything. They live in the mcmansions of yesteryear.
      Upper middle class. These guys are automating everything as fast as they can. They are doing ok. They live in a mcmansion. The house will have 2-3 baths.
      Upper class. These are the 'managers' of everything. They manage everything. They live in some sort of gated community. The house will be 5000+ sq ft. Lots of custom work.
      1% These dudes own everything. They fart right and make 100k. They live on one of their many estates. They have servants for their servants. They decide how monetary policy is set between countries. They 'bribe'/'campaign contribute' whatever laws they want.

      There are exceptions but this list is mostly true. The 1%rs have moved all the jobs to other countries that want everyone to be working welfare level of jobs. All the while telling us what an amazing thing it is. It is, for them.

      Pretty much upper middle class and down buy from that sector. Their monetary ability to buy things has been shrinking since the early 70s with a nice haircut in 2008 (next one setting up for 17/18). With one side saying 'if only we raised taxes everything would be hunky dory for everyone' the other side saying 'if only we lowered taxes everything would be hunky dory'. Yet missing the whole point is we need jobs.

    2. Re:Not really by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      One thing is an exploding crime problem at their stores because there is not enough personnel around. [bloomberg.com] Who wants to go shopping in a crime zone?

      That just leaves us more room to have mobility scooter races in the aisles. I'm trying to start a new hybrid sport that involves hopped-up mobility scooters and shotguns from he Walmart sporting goods department. You start at the hardware section and run a LeMans-style course around the store and you can use the shotgun (with beanbag rounds, for safety) to try to stop your opponents. Everything you need, including the safety gear, is right there in the store.

      Tell me you wouldn't watch that instead of a boring NASCAR race that's nothing but left-hand turns. Hell yes, you would.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Not really by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Eventually those stores will go away. They're already centralizing and consolidating, as more and more people shop online there will be less stores necessary. The 'only' problem we haven't gotten over yet is "I need a pound of sugar to finish my cupcakes, run to the store" but between drones and instant delivery couriers, the cost of that will go down as well. There is HUGE overhead in grocery stores, between thefts, accidents and keeping a building not just running but safe for customers and space for us meatbags to walk around, you could easily condense any Walmart into 1/4 of it's size if we didn't have to walk around in them.

      We just have to get deliveries down to both the time and transport "cost" of you yourself driving to the store (~5 miles and 30 minutes turnaround time or about $0.50-1 in gas with your average car). Electric and automated delivery vehicles would be perfect I think, like a vending machine/truck on wheels. You keep a set of 'hot items' stocked (eggs, milk, bread, ...) and then once in a while you detour to the local stock to refill or for special orders or other deliveries. It could all be done automated, replace existing convenience stores and supermarkets with small and large depots.

      You encourage people to still make larger grocery orders or you could even plan out meals fully automated, have them ordered and the next two or three days of groceries arrives at your convenience, if you still need something 'instant' give them a voucher for 1 "instant" trip per planned grocery order.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    4. Re:Not really by raind · · Score: 1

      If we programmed the computers to everyone's benefit then that would be something. http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

      --
      Get up!
    5. Re:Not really by fuzznutz · · Score: 2

      Everything is not rosy with Walmart's penchant to do away with workers. One thing is an exploding crime problem at their stores because there is not enough personnel around. Who wants to go shopping in a crime zone? That and a popular local Walmart has an extremely hard time keeping the store shelves stocked. It's wonderful to have low prices, but I usually am wasting my time going there only to see empty shelves.

      So disposing of workers only goes so far. I simply do not believe that our android workers will arrive in the near future to mitigate these problems created by lack of workers.

      Amen! I stopped at a Walmart on the way home from a family reunion a few years ago in an area I assumed should be safe. A friend of mine had warned me about that location since it was near his home, but I thought he was joking. I was afraid I wouldn't make it back to my car. I had my kids lock themselves in the car while I put away the groceries. I never returned there again.

      The Bloomberg article is eye-opening. The Walmart closest to me is a shithole. The shelves are frequently empty and the customers do not look like "natives." I live in a fairly affluent area and I always wondered why the Walmart three miles down the road is so run down, especially after the huge expansion a couple years ago. It is in a very congested retail area with a large mall and NONE of the other stores in the area look anything like it. It looks like the Walmart crime/demographics database is the secret reason why there are so few employees running the place. You hardly ever see more than a handful of employees. I usually drive much farther and go to a better stocked, cleaner and safer Walmart in a blue collar area when I need staple groceries.

      I remember when Walmart first opened in our region back in 1991 and ran Kmart and a couple grocery chains out. Their stores were clean and you could never find an empty shelf. When they ran out of an item, the tags were removed and something else was put in its place until the stock truck arrived. Now it's a disaster area. If it weren't for canned and dry goods groceries, water softener salt and soaps, I'd abandon them completely.

    6. Re: Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, we don't. And we won't have them. It's over. Those who could secure their little place in the sun have done so, the rest... Tough luck, there is no room anymore. People have had decades to see the big shift coming and what did they do? They sat and did nothing and waited for politicians to do something. LOL. Like politics can do anything against global economy. Enjoy the corpse ditches, have-nots.

    7. Re:Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If there's something we have clear evidence of these past 40-50 years is that people are willing to put up with anything, including loss of health and life, if the price tag shrinks a bit.

    8. Re:Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the free market, consequences of that. People forget that freedom means freedom to abandon people and humanity.

    9. Re:Not really by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      Yes, I'm sure automating away some invoicing and accounting positions from the HQ or service offices will cause the the individual stores to go empty and turn into crime zones.

    10. Re:Not really by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

      Reminds me of the story of iRobot (or some other robot company). They wanted to make an industrial floor cleaning robot, but cleaning floors involves 3 passes (pouring wax, buffing, and something else). Not wanting to build 3 robots, they came up with one that did all 3 operations in one pass. When they showed off the robot at a trade show, people were much impressed. And then asked "could you take out that computer, and mount a handle so the janitor can push the machine around?". Turns out building supervisors didn't want robots, they wanted a janitor to clean and at the same time keep an eye on the place and make small repairs.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    11. Re:Not really by anarcobra · · Score: 1

      About 40 years ago in europe we didn't have supermarkets.
      Instead the milk man and the greengrocer would make their rounds and bring cheese, milk, and vegetables right to your door.
      Maybe we will return to that model.
      Maybe instead of a UPS truck there will be a wallmart truck driving around dropping off peoples food orders every morning.
      Of course, you actually have to be home for this to work, or will they just leave it out by the door?

    12. Re:Not really by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      Depends on the local crime rate.
      In some areas you can leave packages on your front porch for months and no one will take them.
      In others you will return home to find someone has stolen the screen doors off of your home.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    13. Re:Not really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You want to build a Mario Kart track in a wal mart?

    14. Re:Not really by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      You want to build a Mario Kart track in a wal mart?

      More than almost anything in the world.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  6. automate the shoppers by mdsolar · · Score: 1

    That store is really unpleasant to enter. Be great if robots could be sent in to do the shopping....

    Oh, wait, that's amazon....

  7. Wage pressure by mattwarden · · Score: 0

    Automation doesn't just happen randomly. It is the result of capital investments made when the benefit outweighs the cost. Walmart has to deal with ACA, FMLA, new overtime rules, hikes in he min wage, and their recent voluntary company-wide min wage increase. They first beat up their suppliers to extract savings from them. And then they looked for savings elsewhere.

    Automation is inevitable as the capital cost falls. But increasing the cost of human labor accelerates the process significantly. Creative destruction is a good thing, but it does hurt individuals temporarily who will need to retrain and adjust. So the pace is no small thing, and accelerating the transformation is not benign.

    1. Re:Wage pressure by RichPowers · · Score: 1

      Yes, the benevolent, all-knowing central planners have signaled the following over the past three decades: the central banks will collude to keep interest rates extremely low, and minimum wages will continue to increase in many jurisdictions. After all, these planners are more qualified than market participants to determine who should get paid what.

      Regardless of one's political inclinations, I find it interesting how these factors (along with the ones you mentioned) interact to move the goalposts, i.e., when automation makes financial sense. Money is cheap and labor, especially at the low end, is comparatively expensive, assuming it's on the books. (To your list I would also add licensing requirements for all sorts of professions and trades.) But at the end of the day, if you use the power of the state to make it difficult to hire, employ, and fire people, enterprises will just figure out how to avoid employing them in the fist place, starting with the bottom of the ladder first. Then everyone can be on the dole and vote for the politicians that keep the handouts flowing!

    2. Re:Wage pressure by n3r0.m4dski11z · · Score: 2

      Hopefully you are arguing for a guaranteed income in that case. Because of course, someone needs to buy the goods that walmart resells, or "middlemans".

      --
      -
    3. Re:Wage pressure by Kjella · · Score: 2

      Automation is inevitable as the capital cost falls. But increasing the cost of human labor accelerates the process significantly. Creative destruction is a good thing, but it does hurt individuals temporarily who will need to retrain and adjust. So the pace is no small thing, and accelerating the transformation is not benign.

      That's the usual march of progress, as long as people find new jobs that's fine. If everyone were fit for higher education as doctors, engineers, lawyers and so on we'd not mourn the loss of taxi drivers and burger flippers. Not everyone is looking to solve hard, creative problems at work. Me, I'd probably get bored otherwise but lots and lots of people just want to be trained in a task, do that task and collect their paycheck. Those kinds of "doer" jobs are the prime targets for automation and disappearing across the board.

      Every time they list a position with hardly any education or experience necessary, there's a massive number of applicants and it ends up a game of musical chairs where most people don't get the job. I know a few people on disability benefit, I'd say for a century ago they'd be deemed "simpletons" and had some basic menial labor. A few hundred years ago most people were illiterate but they still had jobs, today I'd say an illiterate person is mostly unemployable so it's already happened a bit. But now it might start eating into a significant fraction of the population.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Wage pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Automation doesn't just happen randomly. It is the result of capital investments made when the benefit outweighs the cost. Walmart has to deal with ACA, FMLA, new overtime rules, hikes in he min wage, and their recent voluntary company-wide min wage increase. They first beat up their suppliers to extract savings from them. And then they looked for savings elsewhere.

      Automation is inevitable as the capital cost falls. But increasing the cost of human labor accelerates the process significantly. Creative destruction is a good thing, but it does hurt individuals temporarily who will need to retrain and adjust. So the pace is no small thing, and accelerating the transformation is not benign.

      Are... are you stupid? Because this post makes you seem extremely stupid. Don't believe the hype. Wages have very little to do with any of this. It's the ever increasing need to make more money than the year before. Walmart make 131 billion dollars in PROFIT last year. If they made 121 billion this year and redistributed the rest to their front line employees it wouldn't truly hurt anything. It might fuck with the stock market but that's because that has no bearing on reality and is just a circle jerk of reactionary idiots. Simply look at the Nintendo Pokemon GO insanity for that. That stock shot up for absolutely no reason other than investors are mostly idiots.

      None of the things you mentioned are actually going to make Walmart unprofitable. Not even close. They are trivial costs compared to Walmart revenue. Walmart and other companies like it are simply greedy dicks.

    5. Re: Wage pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It already exists. It's called finding a job. Where I live, the SF Bay Area, there is unlimited demand for filling jobs that pay $11-$14 "minimum wage" no skills and $18+ for low-end skills.

    6. Re:Wage pressure by tsotha · · Score: 1

      This. What did central bankers expect to happen when they started giving away money for almost free? They made it mandatory for corporations to automate everything that can be automated - if you don't do it your competition will.

    7. Re: Wage pressure by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      It already exists. It's called finding a job. Where I live, the SF Bay Area, there is unlimited demand for filling jobs that pay $11-$14 "minimum wage" no skills and $18+ for low-end skills.

      And chances are, the cost of living in that area is so horrific that even the $18/hr workers either have to spend the greater part of their free time commuting to and from work, working enough additional jobs so they have a 23 hour work day, or have to find a bridge to live under; because those subpoverty wages are nowhere near enough to actually be the minimal living wage that minimum wage was intended to be.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    8. Re:Wage pressure by mattwarden · · Score: 1

      You appear to have read a lot of words in my comment I never wrote. For example, you are telling me Walmart isn't going to be unprofitable due to the cost of human labor. Well, I never said they would, so that's a strange counter-argument. Your "major insight" is that Walmart is trying to maximize profit. Amazing intellectual contribution!

      Maybe you can't follow because I'm too stupid to write at your level.

  8. They took our jerbs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Butlerian jihad in 3..2..

  9. April (not so) fools joke by ClickOnThis · · Score: 0

    I submitted this as an April Fools post several months ago. As time goes on, it seems less and less far-fetched.

    Retail giant Walmart today annouced the start of a program to clone employees to staff its almost 10,000 stores worldwide. Speaking from inside Walmart's flagship store in Bentonville, Arkansas, Stella de Ville, Senior VP of Human R&D, described the program as a "win-win" for Walmart and its associates, with potential to optimize the "right-fit" of employees with their positions. "We want employees to be happy and thrive in their jobs" explained de Ville. "What better way to do this than to design their DNA so that it's inevitable?" De Ville went on to describe future plans that could include the cloning of lower and middle management candidates, and ultimately customers. "There's a long development time for this, because we're talking about years of growth for a clone to mature to a marginally literate and functioning member of Walmart society, but the benefits are significant. We are making the required investment in the lobbying of legislators to ensure that our young and growing cloned Walmarters are supported by the social welfare system and are educated to Walmart standards with taxpayer assistance." When asked about the inevitable exercise of free will by some of the clone candidates who may not wish to be Walmart employees or customers, de Ville replied "Uh, those candidates will be re-directed towards other objectives" as she shifted uneasily on her feet and glanced over to the store's frozen-meat section.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  10. 100% Automation coming soon. by frnic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And there is no economic model to tell us how that is going to work. But, not far in the future - many of us will see it, if we don't kill ourselves off first, all manual labor will be automated. And soon after that there will be no labor required to produce any products - production and distribution will be totally automated. At that point labor will have no value and our world economy will cease to exist.

    1. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do people still believe this sci-fi crap? We were hearing the same shit 50 and 100 years ago, and it was bullshit back then, too.

    2. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by tsotha · · Score: 1

      We're still a long way from general purpose robots, and even longer from general purpose robots that are cheaper to operate than employing a person. Nobody alive today is going to see this.

    3. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by c · · Score: 1

      But, not far in the future - many of us will see it, if we don't kill ourselves off first, all manual labor will be automated.

      Manual labour in controlled and/or homogeneous environments will be automated, yes. Factories, warehouses, farms, transport, etc are all to some degree or another fairly good candidates for this.

      Fixing stuff that's broken, though, will remain the domain of humans for a long time. We simply have too much infrastructure that would need to be heavily rebuilt to make it robot-repairable.

      It won't be enough jobs for the number of people, but manual labour isn't going away in our lifetime.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    4. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      General purpose robots were a dumb idea in the first place. 100 years ago, if you asked someone to describe a robot driving a car, they would have described a robotic man who gets into the driver's seat. The concept that the car itself would be a robot was a long ways off.

      But it's 100 later. Literally everything is or could be a robot. Try to keep up.

    5. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by frnic · · Score: 1

      Japan is building an autonomous letter farm in a building. Autonomous taxis are now operational in controlled locations. Fast food chains are evaluating autonomous fast food stores. Significant use of robotics in manufacturing has been reality for years. Significant automation in farming and harvesting has been a reality for years.

      Sorry, you are wrong, and change always happens faster than expected. It is not always the change that is expected, but change none the less.

    6. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by frnic · · Score: 1

      I disagree, I believe it will become cheaper to replace/recycle than to fix.

      I do believe that most of us will not benefit and will devolve into some form of subclass and only the upper class with benefit. The rich will no longer need worker bees to make them money, so they will move away from employee based operations into totally automated production of things they want.

    7. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by evilviper · · Score: 4, Insightful

      100% Automation coming soon. And there is no economic model to tell us how that is going to work.

      It won't be 100% automation, it will be 99% automation, and we have a historical example in agriculture. It used to be that nearly everyone had to be a farmer, producing their own food to survive. Now a tiny fraction of the population can run the machinery to produce ample food for everyone.

      So manufacturing and distribution is heading this way too? Great! I'm tired of paying $1000 for a refrigerator... When they get down to $10, you can tell me how horrible near-complete automation is for our economy. I've seen this happening in my own lifetime... The most basic power tools cost several weeks of salary a few decades ago. Now you can buy a complete drill for about 1-hour of minimum wage salary. Clothing used to be an investment, too, and sewing machines were everywhere so rips could be fixed. Now you just throw out anything with any imperfections.

      When this model transfers over to home construction, medicine, and other skilled-labor-intensive industries, we'll be in good shape. Your biggest monthly costs getting driven down to 1% the price will let even the poorest live comfortably. And when you don't have to pack into a few big cities to get a high-paying job to survive, the expensive cities will slowly dissipate. People will disperse to cheaper areas and do some trivial little jobs that never-the-less easily pays for all their living expenses.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    8. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      The rich will no longer need worker bees to make them money

      As long as the "worker bees" require money to buy the stuff "the rich" make, "the rich" will need "worker bees".

      No, there's not going to be a "subclass", particularly. No more than now, anyway. What there will be is an increasingly large class of people who have the leisure time that "the rich" have now....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    9. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by pablo_max · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but this is bullshit.
      How are the poor people going to get any money when there is no work? Most of the Jesus people in America would rather see those people die on the streets than to give them "hand outs".
      Could everyone in America be fed, housed, clothed, educated and entertained with only 10% of the people working? Of course they could. But, this will never happen. The religious right will never allow it.

    10. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by pablo_max · · Score: 1

      Well, since no one will be employed, it wont much matter what it costs. Rest assured that it will be more than we can afford.
      Then... back to lords and surfs.

    11. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      100% automation won't ever be a thing as someone needs to maintain and correct the automated equipment.

      I remember working at a biscuit factory one day, and due to a staff shortage I got assigned to a position to I'd never done before. "Supervise the automated strapping machine". My mind was blown, and I nearly died of boredom, but I was being paid $30/h to watch a machine do it's work.

    12. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      @CrimsonAvenger: What there will be is an increasingly large class of people who have the leisure time that "the rich" have now....just without the resources to enjoy it. There, fixed that for you.

    13. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by tsotha · · Score: 1

      I'm not wrong. Change does happen faster than expected. But long, long after it was expected. Certainly we can build single-purpose machines, in some cases, cheaply enough to use. That's automation. But we're not even close to a self-repairing machine that has the coordination, stamina, and sensory capabilities of a person, and that's what it's going to take to displace people entirely from productive work.

    14. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This'll go nowhere because AC, but whatever.

      I can't agree with you here for the simple reality of greed. For this to work, the haves need to share the rewards of automation with the have-nots. This WILL NOT HAPPEN. Are you convinced that somehow, greed will go away as human workers are replaced? The only time I can think of in which I've heard of anything along those lines is when the CEO of JAL took massive pay cuts to his own salary. The automation will increase profits, which will just sit in the same pockets that are already being lined with the current screwing of the have-nots.

    15. Re:100% Automation coming soon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Japan is building an autonomous letter farm in a building.

      Why? Is the postal system that in need of something to deliver? Wouldn't it make more sense to automate the delivery of the mail? Especially if the mail volume is so low that they are automating production of letters... I guess we are working towards full robot employment. Robots producing letters so that other robots can deliver them, eventually we could have them delivered to other robots!

  11. Ford Motor Co. used a simple accounting system by Streetlight · · Score: 1

    Speaking of Henry Ford - a couple of posts above did - the Ford Motor Company many years ago "automated" it's accounting system that required very low level personnel. It was determined that an average debit statement was for a certain dollar amount and the same for credit documents. They also knew the number of documents in a pound of them. The "accountants" simply weighed stacks of the two kinds of documents to determine their respective values. No computers, no thick books of records (spreadsheets) requiring meticulous data entry, just weigh stacks of sorted papers occasionally to determine income and expenses. Walmart could do the same thing, though it would require a lot of paper.

    --
    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
    1. Re:Ford Motor Co. used a simple accounting system by JonBoy47 · · Score: 1

      The "accounting by weight" method masked significant cash-flow problems in the company that threatened it with insolvency. Fearful a disruption to military production during WWII due to the company's financial state, the War Production Board quietly contrived to have Henry Ford II, then in his 20's, released from his Navy service, so he could return to Detroit and help manage the company.

    2. Re:Ford Motor Co. used a simple accounting system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's wrong with just weighing the computers?

  12. Good for the community? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whew, they are such a good company. I'm really glad that many cities gave them huge tax breaks. They are sure doing a lot of good for the communities they are in.

  13. There's a lot of white collar jobs... by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

    ...up for replacement soon. It's not just the manual laborers that are on the chopping block. We need to be preparing for a world where there is literally not enough work to go around.

    1. Re:There's a lot of white collar jobs... by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      But that could be such a good thing. We're actually moving towards post-scarcity economies, but we're to stupid to realize it, and the top 1% are too greedy to accept it.

      --
      Eat the rich.
  14. Overblown by JeffOwl · · Score: 4, Insightful

    #1 Walmart employs around 2 million people worldwide. This does not even move the needle. #2 This has been happening for years. First it was the adding machine, then the electronic calculator, then the big computers, then the smaller ones. This should not come as a shock to anyone.

    1. Re:Overblown by pablo_max · · Score: 1

      Of course it is not a shock. That is the entire basis for the western economy. Eliminate all costs, i.e. jobs, until there is no one left who can afford to by your discount product.

    2. Re:Overblown by pablo_max · · Score: 1

      No, it is not overblown.
      Stop for a moment and think about the bigger picture. What happens when everything is automated? Where will you work? How will you pay your mortgage? Do you think that engineering cannot be automated? In time, it will be.
      Are you a manager? Do you think all those managers will be needed when there are workers?
      It does not take a crystal ball to see that this is the path we are on.

    3. Re:Overblown by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      If everything is automated, then we don't need to work to supply all our needs and wants.

      If all of our needs and wants are not being supplied by these automated systems, then there's still a job to do which (per the premise) was not automated.

    4. Re:Overblown by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      Knowledge, skill and experience are being built into software to a much greater extent now, so there will be many fewer knowledge workers. We see that in the engineering world and there are hardly any entry-level tasks remaining that have not been automated. So we end up with expensive, older workers being replaced by software operated by relatively inexperienced people performing fairly high level work.

    5. Re:Overblown by JeffOwl · · Score: 1

      No, it is not overblown. Stop for a moment and think about the bigger picture. What happens when everything is automated? Where will you work? How will you pay your mortgage? Do you think that engineering cannot be automated? In time, it will be. Are you a manager? Do you think all those managers will be needed when there are workers? It does not take a crystal ball to see that this is the path we are on.

      Right, so we should have never automated anything because it would have never lead to more interesting fields of work that improved productivity and lead to higher qualities of life. If we listened to your logic we would still be pulling seeds out of cotton by hand. Efficiency means we get to spend more effort on things that go beyond our needs and improve our leisure time, which the automation will give us more of. The fact is that we have no idea what is next in terms of technology and what fields will open up 100 years from now so it isn't really justified to say that it will eventually be automated away. On the other hand, if we did get to the point where everything was automated to the point where everyone was supplied what they want or need without anyone having to work, then I'd celebrate and take the rest of my life off enjoying all the free stuff.

  15. Bring Back the Thorazine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    You Bernie retards that can't spend more than 10 minutes research to disprove your "I want free money" bullshit need to be lobotomized. Here is a hint since people have become full on retard: $10,000 in Detroit spends quite differently from $10,000 in Phoenix, and different than DC, and different than LA, and different than Chicago. Your fucking Utopia won't exist without a perfectly even cost of living across the globe, and how exactly do you plan to work that into your "gimme shit cuz I like smokin pot more than workin" plan?

    Go move out to Burning man and stay there. Dipshit

    1. Re:Bring Back the Thorazine! by lroylw · · Score: 1

      Would that be Bernie as in Made-off?

    2. Re:Bring Back the Thorazine! by catprog · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't people move from the expensive areas to the cheap areas?

      One of the problems with moving is trying to find an income in the new location. If you are getting an income straight away that is one hurdle down.

      --
      My Transformation Website
      Kindle Books http://www.catprog.org/rev
      Interactive CYOA http://www.catprog.org/st
  16. where everything, including housing is free = jail by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    where everything, including housing is free = jail / prison. And they have doctors that do more then the ER and don't say we don't take Medicaid

  17. Industrial Revolutions: Then and Now by careysub · · Score: 1

    Industrial Revolution counting is a bit of a problem. The first two Industrial Revolutions are pretty much agreed on. The First (of course) from 1770 to 1850, when factories and steam power revolutionized the textile industry and transportation, and the second with the rise of the chemical industry and assembly line production from 1870 to 1914. Widespread use of electricity and the internal combustion engine after 1920 is often considered the Third Industrial Revolution, but some people consider it an extension of the second.

    Then we have the advent of computers, the "Digital Revolution." It seems clear that this was, indeed revolutionary, but this is not usually called the Fourth Industrial Revolution, because while important, it seems less profound than the first three which utterly transformed civilization beyond recognition. So just giving it it's own name seems appropriate.

    Similarly, I think we should call what is happening now the "Cybernetic Revolution", rather than trying to decide whether this the Third, or Fourth, or maybe even Fifth IR. It is truly revolutionary, harnessing the cumulative power of the digital revolution to bring about truly unprecedented levels of task automation. And it will, I believe, resemble the First IR more than the other two in a very important way - large numbers of jobs are going to be eliminated rapidly, with nothing to replace them. The FIR threw almost 20% of Britain out of work between 1770 and 1800, creating a wave of petty crime, a huge population of paupers, Dickensian slums, and poor houses - essentially prisons for people who had committed no crimes. The new industrial economy did not provide enough jobs to restore full employment until 1840, or even later, 70 years of destitution.

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    1. Re: Industrial Revolutions: Then and Now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And why would that be a problem? The displaced people had 70 years to die off. It took care of itself and this time it will be no different, just on a larger scale.

  18. When by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    will the "spokeswoman" position become automated?

    1. Re: When by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has been possible since the VOTRAX came out.

  19. Cheaper than $15/hour by Chas · · Score: 1

    This is what's going to happen as people try to force $15 for bottom-rung unskilled jobs.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re:Cheaper than $15/hour by Desler · · Score: 1

      I agree. How dare they want to make a living wage that still only amounts to a fractions of a percent of their CEO's pay. What unmitigated greed. *rolls eyes*

    2. Re:Cheaper than $15/hour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol ... more correctly, this is what's going to happen as long as wages for any given job are >$0, *and* it is possible to automate those jobs.

      Even at the current minimum-wage rates, automation is coming ...

    3. Re:Cheaper than $15/hour by Chas · · Score: 0

      Your argument is based in classism.

      Had you said something about a "liveable wage", I'd have been inclined to be more forgiving.

      But you're just regurgitating the notion that you're somehow "owed" because someone makes more than you.

      Fuck that shitty, self-entitled noise.

      You don't get paid what a CEO does because you don't do a CEO's job. You don't have a CEO's level of risk.

      Your primary duty is to show up (it'd be nice if it were ON TIME too), and do what you're told to do. Like the good little trained monkey you are.

      If you think that BASIC WORK ETHIC entitles you to a high paying salary, you're nuts.

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    4. Re:Cheaper than $15/hour by Chas · · Score: 1

      There's always going to be some minimum wage, grunt labor jobs.

      Just, as the costs of automation come down, and the demands of such workers keeps going up, yeah. At a certain point, automation is just going to be cheaper.

      At that point, it's "Improve your job skills or starve."

      Thoguh I expect the idiots in government will institute yet another hand-out program designed to keep people sucking the public teat, rather than actually trying to make something of themselves.

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    5. Re:Cheaper than $15/hour by ultranova · · Score: 1

      You don't get paid what a CEO does because you don't do a CEO's job. You don't have a CEO's level of risk.

      What risk? If the company does well the CEO gets a bonus, if it does badly the CEO gets a golden parachute and a new job from his friends in other companies.

      You don't get paid what a CEO does because the CEO belongs to the ruling class and you don't.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  20. Accountancy by RogueyWon · · Score: 1

    Doing my part to be a good corporate citizen, I recently agreed to be the "independent" member of a recruitment panel at my organisation, for some mid-ranking accountant positions. I'm not an accountant myself, but our HR rules dictate that one member of any recruitment panel must be from outside the area of the business that's hiring.

    To be frank, I didn't really have the best idea of what accountants did with their days, but over the course of a week of interviews, I started to pick some of it up. And the first thing that crossed my mind as I did so was "oh wow, these jobs are going to be done by computers within a few years". So much of it wasn't much more than interaction with already highly automated software tools. It was clear that it would only take one more, fairly thin layer of automation on top of this, combined with a bit of automated business information gathering, for the human role at this grade to be eliminated.

    We're generally a long way from the front of the automation curve (that's putting things mildly), so I'm sure things are much further along elsewhere. What's going to make this rough, though, is that these are jobs with a fairly high requirement in terms of education and professional qualification. Moreover, and I admit this may be a UK-specific problem, accountancy is a career that has long been seen as high status in some of our immigrant communities, particularly those from the Indian subcontinent and parts of the Middle East. So if the 20 or so applicants I saw for the posts we were hiring for are any indication (all bar one of whom were either Asian or Middle Eastern), the "costs" of this wave of automation are going to fall heavily on those communities.

    1. Re:Accountancy by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      looking at what the accounting department does at my employer, most those jobs could have been automated decades ago.

  21. Automation doesn't buy stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People buy stuff not robots. You don't see robots buying houses, cars, groceries, big screen TV's, electronics. Yeah, the counter is that you create jobs to build robots, support them, service them, program them. But how much of that is actually done here in the US? Sorry, I don't buy this ideal automation is good for jobs.

  22. OMG it's happening by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Marshall Brain wrote an interesting scenario back in 2003. Worth a read!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manna_(novel)

  23. Outsourced machines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 5 years time the US robots will lose their jobs to Chinese robots. Then they'll all be forced into the gig economy, maybe driving Uber cars if they're lucky enough to be the right shape.

  24. Accounting and invoicing by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 1

    Accounting and invoicing...

    That's the people that sort stacks of paper, that copy/paste numbers from one spreadsheet to another, that have shorter lines to upper management, that are expected to linger around a company as necessary overhead, that have to be wooed in order to get necessary and over due stuff done and that are never targeted when optimizing. Yet now that are.

    Seems logical. But I had expected blue collar to be sacked first. And that A&I would have been able to delay the chopping block (most likely that will have.)

    Let's face it. Crap jobs will vanish and will be replaced by cheaper and better better machines. The question is how we as a society will adapt to these changes. More people will be affected that we can imagine. Unemployed will become the default occupation. The unemployed will be so of no fault of their own. Letting these people rot is not just immoral but will cause riots and unrest.

    I believe in meritocracy and not in utopia. But reality seems to push us towards the latter. Interesting times are a-changin' (but not exactly like Bob intended.)

    With so much time on our hands, will we all become enlightened or will we turn into a bunch of feckless morons?

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
  25. The Headline is Derogatory by NEDHead · · Score: 1

    It should read "Walmart is Cutting 7000 Jobs THANKS to Automation"

  26. Guaranteed income by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's the next step, already being tested in USA

  27. An observation. by mbone · · Score: 1

    In our time, automation is mostly an excuse for the transfer of wealth and power into ever fewer hands.

    1. Re:An observation. by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      Wealth, yes. Power? No.

      Our politicians only cater to them because the people don't care. As it gets worse for the average person, more and more will care. You saw it in this election, where both parties had serious populist contenders. Actually the previous one was too. Obama was not the Dem's first choice either. Eventually the populists will start winning and wealth will start getting redistributed again.

  28. Automation should be illegal by pablo_max · · Score: 2

    I know, I know... I am a communist, socialist and all the rest of it, but it makes sense.
    There are 1 basic rule of capitalism. Survival of the fittest.
    It turns out, however, that survival of the fittest is not always the best approach when you want to hold a society together. That is why we have things like anti monopoly rules. The "end game" for capitalism is to eliminate all competition so that in the end, there is only one.
    This of course is massively short sighted, given that most of the population will won't have jobs and then cannot afford to buy your stuff. Especially since most so many people in the US firmly believe that if you lose your job, you should be homeless and starve to death if you cannot find a new job in time. Being good the Christians that they are.
    That is same with automation, It should not be allowed. Can low level jobs be replaced with robots? Of course they can. But what the fuck are the people going to do for work?
    Is everyone going to be a manager?
    Is everyone going to start their own business?
    No, of course not. Instead, those people will go hungry. They will go without insurance. Their kids will not have an education.
    This is bad for everyone.
    Of course, we all know that we are at a point where most food items and "stuff" can be made nearly with complete automation. We can produce enough for every single person to eat and have a place to live and clothes on their back.
    But... We wont. Because those people are lazy, and should die. Right?
    Eventually, that will happen. Or at least I hope. But until that time, those people "need" jobs.
    You do not "need" a cheaper iphone. You only "want" cheaper stuff.
    Next time you shop at a discount store, ask yourself.. why is this item so much cheaper than the local mom and pop shop? What is this really costing me?

    1. Re:Automation should be illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never actually lived under Communism - or met anyone who has I'd wager.

  29. So much for higher education... by ErichTheRed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, in the US, we automate agriculture enough to get the workforce down to 2% of the population. Then we automate enough of the manufacturing sector to reduce it to 8% of the population, not including the millions of offahored factory jobs. Then we tell everyone they have to go to college and get at least a 4 year degree to have any hope of a stable future. The vast majority of people at non-top tier universities are doing the minimum required to get a degree, majoring in business or psychology or communications. In the past, all of those people were absorbed into random entry-level positions doing the kind of work Walmart is now automating. It's a ritual - party through 4 years, show up at the campus career center during your senior year, do a few interviews and pick Random Large Employer to work for as a Random Paper Processing Position. What exactly are people proposing that we do with these "C students," who number in the millions and contribute to society through taxes, buying stuff and raising little C students?
    - Most of them don't have the aptitude for tech careers (many of which are being automated as well...)
    - Most of them can't be trained in a skilled trade without asking them to go back through another 4 years of apprenticeship
    - Almost none can become doctors, lawyers, etc. because the competition is so keen to get in to medical/law school
    - They can't be investment bankers or management consultants, because those professions only recruit from the Ivy League

    I know it's no one's dream to process paperwork, but it has traditionally been one of the most stable ways for middle-skilled people to earn a living and have a career. Students starting out as a Associate Paper Processor have the opportunity to become a Senior Paper Processor, then a Paper Processor Supervisor, Manager of Paper Processing, Director of Document Services, and so on. For everyone in corporate IT, think of all the paper processors we directly support, working away in their cubicles. Most are incapable of doing any more than a defined procedure on an input stack of work. If you suddenly say all these people are unemployed, what do you propose replacing their jobs with? When that good salary goes away, the government doesn't get its payroll tax, the unemployed person chooses not to buy a house and therefore doesn't pay property taxes into the system, they choose not to procreate and reduce the birth rate to an unsustainable level. And, they don't buy anything, meaning businesses can't sell the products they make.

    I'm not saying we become Luddites and stop the automation, but we as a whole need to think about what we're going to do with a very large disaffected population. Look how much support Trump has among factory workers who are still unemployed or underemployed even though everyone's being told the economy is in OK shape. I'm one of those people who feels that full employment above all else should be the goal, even if we do make-work for some of it. You can't have millions of people sitting around with nothing to do and no purpose -- it will lead to massive crime over the long run as people get bored and tired of being broke.

  30. Jesus people by pablo_max · · Score: 2

    Ironically, the ones who scream the loudest against helping the "unwashed masses" are the Jesus people. Conservative Christians seem fundamentally not capable of allowing someone else a basic standard of life. And yes, that makes them bad people.

    1. Re:Jesus people by 4pins · · Score: 1

      Ironically, the ones who scream the loudest against helping the "unwashed masses" are the Jesus people. Conservative Christians seem fundamentally not capable of allowing someone else a basic standard of life. And yes, that makes them bad people.

      You can't be serious. There are two takes out there in the Church. One, we should take care of the poor ourselves and of our own free will (these are the conservatives). Two, we should support those who will take care of the poor and by any means necessary (these are the liberals). I don't know any Christians that don't want to help the poor, they just have different ways of going about it.

      --
      I will not mourn that which I never had to lose. - Unknown
    2. Re:Jesus people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The folks who scream the loudest about how we need to help the poor - contribute the least to charities. These are the enlightened liberals. The folks on the other side of the fence, who are painted as being pure evil - give the most to charity.

      Go Figure.

      Before the "Great Society" the poverty rate was exactly the same as it is now. Trillions of dollars later... and... no real change.

  31. Manna is finally coming by twms2h · · Score: 2

    http://marshallbrain.com/manna...

    Manna's job was to manage the store, and it did this in a most interesting way. Think about a normal fast food restaurant. A group of employees worked at the store, typically 50 people in a normal restaurant, and they rotated in and out on a weekly schedule. The people did everything from making the burgers to taking the orders to cleaning the tables and taking out the trash. All of these employees reported to the store manager and a couple of assistant managers. The managers hired the employees, scheduled them and told them what to do each day. This was a completely normal arrangement. In the early twenty-first century, there were millions of businesses that operated in this way.

    But the fast food industry had a problem, and Burger-G was no different. The problem was the quality of the fast food experience. Some restaurants were run perfectly. They had courteous and thoughtful crew members, clean restrooms, great customer service and high accuracy on the orders. Other restaurants were chaotic and uncomfortable to customers. Since one bad experience could turn a customer off to an entire chain of restaurants, these poorly-managed stores were the Achilles heel of any chain.

    To solve the problem, Burger-G contracted with a software consultant and commissioned a piece of software. The goal of the software was to replace the managers and tell the employees what to do in a more controllable way. Manna version 1.0 was born. ...

    The first part is a rather depression dystopia. The second part is pure utopia.

    1. Re:Manna is finally coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it was a great short story. I think it should have gone to the next step of having automated kiosks to place the order, RFID chips to handle the payment, preloaded cartridges that dispense food in an automated system, and there is just one human hooked up to the headset doing what they are told.

  32. The "Click Next Admin" is next by ErichTheRed · · Score: 1

    I'm seeing this automation trend as well in IT. Cloud and software-defined everything is messing with the clear line between software development and systems administration. Unless it turns out to be just hype, and companies decide to keep their equipment onsite (not likely,) only a chunk of systems people will survive the next wave of automation. "DevOps" may be poorly defined now and the stuff of ironic-moustache, skinny jeans wearing SV startup hipsters, but it's definitely more mainstream now than it was just a couple years ago. It'll take companies ages to fully move to it, but I do feel it's coming. I just got involved in a project being deployed in Azure, and it really is a different world compared to the single-server-per-application universe. You can build an entire solution out, IaaS and PaaS, with a script. Systems guys who will make it to the next level need to be able to be the ones designing these things, and able to troubleshoot the software defined mess when it goes awry.

    Jeffrey Snover (the guy who invented PowerShell) gave a talk about the "click next admin" who isn't going to make it to the next era of IT. I still know people who do Windows system administration who don't automate anything because they can't or don't want to learn how. As big companies either deploy their own private cloud stuff or go to public clouds like AWS or Azure for everything, the skills IT guys have learned over 20 years aren't going to cut it except in a very few small niches. Yes, nothing has changed under the hood, but the fact that it's abstracted away and you're no longer hand-feeding the servers configs, etc. means that a lot of people who have lots of knowledge on that front are going to either need to retrain or find something else to do. And with the rest of the workforce being automated as well, that "something else" is in serious doubt.

  33. In other words, 0.3% of Walmart employees by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 2

    Walmart, and every other major company everywhere, has been replacing employees with technology at this rate--or more--for years.

  34. $10 refrigerator? Great! Can I have $10 please? by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 2

    As the the other reply to your post said, how are people going to get *any* money if their labor can't be sold?

    Face it, the more jobs get automated, the less labor can be sold for. And when automation gets cheaper in terms of resources than maintaining a person to do the same thing, then the people who own capital will do away with labor entirely.

    Then, people who own "enough" will be fine, and the people who don't own will not be able to labor to make money.

    "But there will always be new jobs" you say? That's been true in the past, but look at what has happened to the earnings of labor in the USA as a fraction of corporate earnings. It has dropped 50% in inflation-adjusted dollars.

    And a weak labor market brings down the value of *all* labor. People have been climbing up the skills ladder like crazy in the USA. More college graduates than ever before. Yet the wages are not higher. Why? Supply and demand. More supply of labor means lower wages for labor. More people fighting over the same jobs.

    Even the poorest won't live comfortably when they can't get *any* money. And the USA has demonstrated a deep hostility to providing a decent safety net. People are reverting to subsistence farming in Detroit.

  35. Extrapolation and the uneducated by Solandri · · Score: 1

    I love The Twilight Zone, but Hollywood comes up with lots of cute but unrealistic stories because almost none of the people who work there came from STEM fields. There are problems which simply can't be solved by a Turing-complete machine. You see, Goedel's incompleteness theorems proved that any logical system is incomplete. There are always problems you can make within that system which cannot be resolved without abstracting your reasoning beyond that system. So until/unless the artificial intelligence folks actually succeed in creating a program which can "think" beyond its programming, there will always be problems which can't be solved by machines but can be solved by people.

    So the jobs being replaced by machines are the simpler, more menial tasks which don't require this sort of creative thinking. The sensors at the doors which detect shoplifting don't always work. They're just programmed to sound an alarm if they sense a RFID tag being carried out. Sometimes the cashier forgets to remove the tag. Sometimes a shoplifter figures out a way to bypass the sensor (e.g. wrap the tag in aluminum foil). It takes a human security guard to analyze, judge, and respond appropriately to each of these situations which fall outside normal procedure and expectations. Not saying humans are perfect are what we do, but our ability to analyze situations which fall outside the scope of what we've been taught, judge how the operating guidelines we were taught would be applied to this new situation if it had been known about before-hand, and respond appropriately based on those extrapolated guidelines, is something machines cannot yet replace us at doing.

    1. Re: Extrapolation and the uneducated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point bro. I just spent 30 minutes reading comments here and finally found the best.

  36. 1000000% completely WRONG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'll be looking at being dead, or enmired in wars of attrition geared toward exterminating the surplus of completely worthless individuals. And if not wars, than plagues. And if not plagues then something else. Maybe even the robots.

    Do you really think that a future filled with automation is going to give you more time to be SUPER HAPPY? while you just lounge around? You think the infrastructure is being constructed to provide more for you? Out of what, some freakish sudden and lasting benevolence?

    That is a conclusion drawn thru the rosiest of proletariat lenses. Heres how it actually works:

        1) when there is not enough grain - the rat population dies down to a level or sustainability. Or, it dies out completely.

        2) when there is endless, perpetual grain, the rat population explodes from ample resources, largely free of contention...until finally

        3) whatever shoebox, or island, or planet or habitat constraint is maxxed out and then the rats start tearing themselves to pieces. Literally. As in "consuming their young" and showing fits of increasingly neurotic frenzy.

    If you think that Ultrariche Megayacht Conglomerate is going to invest in all this WONDERFUL, HELPFUL TECHNOLOGY just so the last empty stretches of land can be filled up with a bunch of surplus Mexican Browns, just loafing around, making extra, redundant copies all day long with no-more-fruit-to-pick-manually because The Robots Do All That Now... ...you are in for a HUGE Surprise, with Extra Disappointment on the side.

  37. Re:$10 refrigerator? Great! Can I have $10 please? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This isn't really about money. It would have to be about capturing all the natural resources that are necessary for a reasonable lifestyle.

    Because if it's about money, it doesn't make sense that more than a minority of the world could be impoverished due to automation. If they aren't getting goods and services from automation, then by definition there are non-automated jobs available to supply them with goods and services, and hence a workable basis for an economy.

  38. One supercomputer by TJHook3r · · Score: 1

    What about when these automated jobs get outsourced to foreign automatons? Chinese robots probably cheaper than American robots. Soon there will be just one robot doing 90% of middle-class jobs.

  39. Re:$10 refrigerator? Great! Can I have $10 please? by evilviper · · Score: 1

    There's no reason to believe that automation over the next century will be able to replace ALL human tasks. There WILL be some jobs humans continue to do better than machines. The pay may fall, but automation will cause the cost of living to plummet at the same time. Imagine buying a car for one a day's wage.

    Agriculture did this long before manufacturing. That's why people can spend less than 15% of their wages on all the food they can eat. Just try and point me to the 100% automated farms...

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  40. Re: $10 refrigerator? Great! Can I have $10 please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, and all those out of luck farmers moved to the cities and went to work in the factories.
    Where do the out of luck factory workers/drivers/Walmart staff move next? We are right now at a point where are no longer able to efficiently match available labor to demand.
    The cost of living does not go down at the same time, it is a trailing indicator. Look how much harder it is for a minimum wage worker to buy a house than it was 50 years ago.
    This is different than prior economic dislocations because we are rapidly elevating the requirements for all jobs, and we don't have another field of work for these people to go to that they are capable of handling.
    It's a problem.

  41. CLINTON 2016! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clinton is a square shooter. Clinton 2016!

  42. Re: $10 refrigerator? Great! Can I have $10 please by evilviper · · Score: 1

    Look how much harder it is for a minimum wage worker to buy a house than it was 50 years ago.

    That's almost entirely a result of PROPERTY prices in dense cities, and also 50 years of population growth. Even today you can get an extremely cheap house, easily afforded on minimum wage salary, just not in a big, dense city.

    People only insist on living in the expensive cities because good paying jobs are increasingly found only there. Once a crummy job will allow you to afford all your necessities, that can quickly change. In fact whenever the jobs market slows down, there's a mass exodus of people away from the expensive cities.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  43. Re:All according to plan, Age of "Big Lebowski" by Metal+Cutter · · Score: 1

    You got to be naive to even make a statement like that. How to respond? Who is going to finance your leisure activities? Rent/Mortgage? What happens when there are a couple of billion (yes BILLION) of these leisurely folks. Maybe, Billionaire Soros will pay for them out of the kindness of his heart? Exterminate the excess?

  44. Rising minimum wage at work by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    Time and time again they keep raising the minimum wage, everything goes up and jobs are eliminated. The jobs eliminated are usually at the low end, high school students, minorities. We know this, yet they keep on lying about it. It also eats away at all of our wages.

  45. And what happens when only a few jobs remain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then only a few people will work. And their labor will be almost worthless because a huge supply and little demand will reduce the price of labor to almost nothing.

        What does everyone else do for income? Suppose the people who own the wealth don't want to share? Not wanting to share is exactly what the 1% in the USA are buying politicians to ensure at the moment.

    So you'll have the 1% with all the economic and political power. Then you'll have the 3% who work for the 1% for just enough to afford to eat. And then you'll have the 96% struggling to get into the 3%.

    All this doesn't have to happen if the 1% actually shares their wealth and power with the 99%. Then the productive capacity can give everyone decent lives. People who want to do creative work will have the financial resources to do so. The Northern European socialist democracies seem to be on this track.

  46. Doomsday! by eric_harris_76 · · Score: 1

    Again.

    Or some entirely mysterious thing may once again prevent catastrophe.

    The same mysterious thing that has been appearing century after century.

    Of course, maybe the people who say "This time it's different" will be right this time.

    People have been saying that too, century after century.

    --
    There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.