Slashdot Mirror


Robots Are Already Replacing Fast-Food Workers (recode.net)

An anonymous reader quotes Recode: Technology that replaces food service workers is already here. Sushi restaurants have been using machines to roll rice in nori for years, an otherwise monotonous and time-consuming task. The company Suzuka has robots that help assemble thousands of pieces of sushi an hour. In Mountain View, California, the startup Zume is trying to disrupt pizza with a pie-making machine. In Shanghai, there's a robot that makes ramen, and some cruise ships now mix drinks with bartending machines.

More directly to the heart of American fast-food cuisine, Momentum Machines, a restaurant concept with a robot that can supposedly flip hundreds of burgers an hour, applied for a building permit in San Francisco and started listing job openings this January, reported Eater. Then there's Eatsa, the automat restaurant where no human interaction is necessary, which has locations popping up across California.

414 comments

  1. Slashdot editors soon.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can't wait for the day robots replace the Slashdot "editors". Maybe the comments can be written by robots too to get rid of ass-hats like me.

    1. Re: Slashdot editors soon.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.bbspot.com/toys/slashtitle/

      Random Slashdot article generator

    2. Re:Slashdot editors soon.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, we can already automate a lot of the comments:

      Topic == solar energy: "But what about when the sun goes down?"

      Topic == global warming: "It SNOWED this winter! Global Warming is a MYTH by money-grabbing scientists and liberals who hate Free Enterprise!"

      Topic == anything economic: "A truly Free Market would solve all that"

      etc., etc. etc.

  2. PIZZA IS NOT A PIE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Damnit.

    1. Re: PIZZA IS NOT A PIE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the moon hits your eye like a big pizza pie, that's amorÃ. Dean has spoken.

    2. Re: PIZZA IS NOT A PIE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dean was wrong.

    3. Re: PIZZA IS NOT A PIE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Castiel will set him right.

    4. Re: PIZZA IS NOT A PIE by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      If the moon hits your eye like a big pizza pie, that's amorÃ. Dean has spoken.

      Right then, what rhymes with eye? Pie, pizza pie.

      But Mr Martin, a pizza and a pie are two different things.

      Fuck off, you're fired.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  3. And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The elimination of all unskilled workers from the lowest to the highest levels. Reaffirms the idea that work will be optional in the future, and that the economy needs somethings like a universal basic income. Technology has done wonders. Now it's time for everyone to benefit from it.

    1. Re:And so it starts... by VanGarrett · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We're moving in that direction, but we're not there, just yet. I think we'll have a rough couple of years, while the automation steps in. Eventually, it'll make things cheaper, but I would imagine that the prices of things will remain on the same gradual increase they've always been alongside inflation, for a while, at least. Eventually, the reduction of full-time employment among the general population will drive prices down. Ultimately, it'll break capitalism, assuming that Congress doesn't step in to make laws preserving it (i.e., banning excess of automation). I can't imagine that we'll be in a place where a UBI is practical for another 15 to 20 years, though. There's just too many problems to solve, first.

    2. Re:And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except it could go the other way.... A cull of the unemployable by the capitalist class.

    3. Re:And so it starts... by Tyr07 · · Score: 1

      It'll only get cheaper for those getting the profits. Unless a competitor comes in using cheap technology to undercut them, it's just more money in their pocket.

      No business person ever lowered prices when their cost was lowered except if a competitor requires them to / they'll make more money by more sales.

    4. Re: And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Possibly, but I get the feeling all this 'Lets stick it to the plebs by bringing back Automats' is a smokescreen for the far larger profits available from eviscerating well-paid middle class jobs. Computerizing nursery nurses or hotel cleaners is pretty expensive with limited savings. Computerized medical diagnostics, stock trading, real estate selling and management is easier and worth many $$$. The nerds laughing at fast food workers now may find themselves flipping burgers in a few years.

    5. Re:And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a total non article. A machine that makes Ramon.. What you think a guy makes all those by hand now? WTF. Of course *most* of the food we eat is made by a machine. The machine that picks the potatoes or harvest the field. The machine that makes the flour. The machine that makes the bread. The machine that makes the noodles, the wontons and the dumplings. I mean seriously "there is even a machine that pizza?" What the fuck do you think made the frozen pizza you get at the supermarket?

    6. Re:And so it starts... by mentil · · Score: 1

      Technically, if a monopoly is forced to sell at a non-optimal point on the price/response curve simply because the cheaper point would be selling at a loss, lowered costs could allow them to sell at that lower point. There would need to be a compelling reason (antitrust laws, marketing etc.) why they cannot sell at the higher point, however.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    7. Re:And so it starts... by plopez · · Score: 1

      Starvation works too. If the starving get unruly fire up the drones, terminators, and robo-cops.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    8. Re:And so it starts... by lgw · · Score: 1

      When all work can be done by robots you'd propose a universal basic income? Get your head out of the 20th century. All that does is give the government ultimate power over everyone who needs that check.

      It's the 21st century. Think universal basic robots. Everyone owns the means of production - at home. Power to the people - well, unless the power goes out.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    9. Re:And so it starts... by thestuckmud · · Score: 1

      With manual labor less in demand, the economy will need less people; paying people to not work is pointless and unsustainable.

      Hmm... If you want to discuss unsustainable actions, let's talk about fostering an underclass effectively locked into perpetual poverty. What alternatives do you propose?. Note that this sort of approach (negative income tax) has been advocated by free market proponents including Milton Friedman.

    10. Re: And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Automation tends to allow individuals to do more work in the same time. It used to take four artisans to operate one weaving loom but no two items were exactly the same and only royalty could afford patterned fabrics. A punched card loom allowed for mass production of patterned fabrics. Uniforms could then be mass produced for professions like armies.

      Telephone operators, police officers doing traffic intersection management and accountancy clerks have all been automated.

    11. Re:And so it starts... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Either that or a drop into deep poverty for almost everyone. It can go either way...

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    12. Re:And so it starts... by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      If you design a restaurant to use automated cooking/assembly, you can reduce the amount of space the kitchen takes up. You can reduce food waste/spoilage, and improve speed.

      Expecting those to translate to consumer prices though is a stretch.

    13. Re:And so it starts... by aberglas · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No, the machines are now getting much smarter. Grinding flour takes a purely mechanical machine. The second generation could use pneumatic computers and simple electrical systems to control them.

      But now computers are ubiquitous and cheap. And they can see. Not very well, but well enough to automate things that were unthinkable a few years ago. Such as picking out parts jumbled in a bin. Or flipping burgers that are not in exactly defined places.

      This third generation will not take over the world. But unlike second generation machines, they can pick strawberries. And will soon be able to clean offices, and paint houses, and pack supermarket shelves, and drive trucks etc. Anything routine.

      Initially the robots are only just a bit cheaper than labour, so slow introduction and minimal price changes. But over time, they get better and cheaper, until anyone that still relies on labour will not be able to compete.

      And real "robots" are not humanoid, with arms and legs. They are purpose built machines, but with far more intelligence than existing machines.

      But the interesting case is still many decades off. When computers can program themselves.

      http://www.computersthink.com/

    14. Re:And so it starts... by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      Point to history when this hasn't happened before.

      We landed on the moon because we put a bunch of African American women sat in the back room somewhere doing calculations.

      We made it through 90% of humanity needing to farm because we automated the boring unskilled part. (Even parts that were so unskilled we had mules and horses do them).

      We'll be fine like we always have been.

    15. Re:And so it starts... by skam240 · · Score: 1

      So that's why in this past year almost every fast food place has started offering $5 meals made up of far more expensive items if bought individually?

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    16. Re:And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So that's why in this past year almost every fast food place has started offering $5 meals made up of far more expensive items if bought individually?

      Basically, yes. The real cost is under $5 so even as a bundled meal the fast food restaurant makes a profit with human workers. Volume sales of a perishable good are more profitable than unsold spoiled food.

    17. Re: And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because power and raw materials are free, right? Take 3d printers as an example, its expensive to produce anything. People can't compete with dedicated production lines and the economies of scale.

    18. Re:And so it starts... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      We landed on the moon because we put a bunch of African American women sat in the back room somewhere doing calculations.

      Actually, all the necessary calculations were already being done by stored-program digital computers, courtesy of the MIT Instrumentation Laboratory which built one of the first embedded computers with digital ICs. Unless your "bunch of African American women" were some stowaways in the Apollo spacecraft armed with calculators.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    19. Re:And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The alternative is to pay people to work in jobs where they are not needed, which is worse.

    20. Re:And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want to discuss unsustainable actions, let's talk about fostering an underclass effectively locked into perpetual poverty.

      GP did talk discuss a solution to that; encouraging birth control instead of rewarding living on the dole is the only sustainable long term solution. UBI, Negative Income Tax, whatever euphemism you prefer, doesn't work.

    21. Re:And so it starts... by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      Money only has value when it circulates. If the robot owners have all the money then it's worthless.

    22. Re:And so it starts... by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      No business person ever lowered prices when their cost was lowered except if a competitor requires them to / they'll make more money by more sales.

      Which happens constantly in innumerable cases across the economy, and always has. The competitors don't require it, the customers do.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    23. Re:And so it starts... by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      So many of you, collectivists, say things like 'it will break capitalism', I have to guess that this nonsense comes from such a fundamental lack of proper education and understanding that it cannot be fixed with any number of comments.

      Capitalism is private ownership and operation of property. Relative price levels going up or down cannot break it anymore than snow or sand can. Your comment is pure drivel, yet it is +5, .

    24. Re:And so it starts... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Point to history when this hasn't happened before.

      We landed on the moon because we put a bunch of African American women sat in the back room somewhere doing calculations.

      We made it through 90% of humanity needing to farm because we automated the boring unskilled part. (Even parts that were so unskilled we had mules and horses do them).

      We'll be fine like we always have been.

      I'm certainly hoping we'll be fine. The trick parts will be regarding the idle population. As the work eliminated expands up the skill ladder, we'll face some issues for a while. The problem is that for one reason or another, many of the folks working the unskilled labor are not going to be capable of moving up. Some folks just aren't that smart, some folks are voracious underachievers. Some folks have problemacious personalities. Are there answers to those issues? Probably.

      But assuming that the present day attitude toward labor costs holds, there isn't a plan for people to move up, the plan is to eliminate jobs. Unless we decide to do make-work.

      So we are possibly looking at a post labor America to start, and the world later.

      The most difficult barrier is going to be the diminishment of the ages old concept of having to work to survive. This is rooted so deeply on most people that few can contemplate the idea. Anyhow, very interesting times we will be living in.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    25. Re:And so it starts... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      We landed on the moon because we put a bunch of African American women sat in the back room somewhere doing calculations.

      Actually, all the necessary calculations were already being done by stored-program digital computers, courtesy of the MIT Instrumentation Laboratory which built one of the first embedded computers with digital ICs. Unless your "bunch of African American women" were some stowaways in the Apollo spacecraft armed with calculators.

      Is this a big whoosh? You are talking about the MIT designed Navigation computer, and OP is talking about Katherine Johnson, one of NACA and later NASA's "computers" - yes, they called the ladies computers. The respect for the woman was so high that John Glenn refused to fly unless she verified the numbers that NASA's first digital computer spit out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    26. Re:And so it starts... by chill · · Score: 2

      You're not taking it to the logical conclusion.

      The removal of the worker from the equation removes their ability to obtain capital, and this participate in private ownership and operation of property.

      By removing what could eventually be upwards of 90% of the participants in the system you will break the system.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    27. Re:And so it starts... by Gussington · · Score: 1

      We're moving in that direction, but we're not there, just yet. I think we'll have a rough couple of years, while the automation steps in.

      Why is it the tone of these stories is always that automation is some new thing? This has already been going on for hundreds of years, sure it getting more rapid and will continue to do so, but the automation concept is as old as the first windmill.

    28. Re:And so it starts... by hambone142 · · Score: 1

      No one has to eat at a place that makes food with robots.

      Frankly, I prefer a hand-smashed burger and a baked on the spot bun.

      I do business with these places because they produce a superior product.

    29. Re:And so it starts... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      This is nothing new... 25 years ago Burger King was already experimenting with live outsourcing of drive through window order taking: you roll up, talk to the video monitor, and the human on the other end is at a call center in Missouri, they take your order and it appears on your monitor and in your local kitchen to be made - in 1991.

    30. Re:And so it starts... by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Nonsense, the only thing that breaks capitalism is any form of government that destroys private property rights, as in makes it illegal from point of view of the law to own and or operate private property. Even if 1 person out of the entire population can afford productive private property and nobody else has the resources but it is not made illegal to obtain, possess and operate property, it is still capitalism. Of course that scenario is nonsense. Labour can always compete with capital if the government does not make it prohibitively expensive to do that.

      Get rid of government laws, rules, income and wealth taxes, government controlling money and manipulating interest rates, redistributing income and property, under those conditions you will have a working economy. Otherwise you will have war.

    31. Re:And so it starts... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1
    32. Re:And so it starts... by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      People will be fine a few hundred years later.

      There were definitely a lot of people not fine from the change.

      It certainly didn't go well in France.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    33. Re:And so it starts... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      Even if the Mercury vehicle wouldn't have worked without one additional person doing some manual checking, which is highly implausible because of how the laws of physics work, John Glenn didn't land on the Moon or even try landing on the Moon.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    34. Re:And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh-oh. Gotta look progressive, or you'll be the first one to be lynched by the mob.

    35. Re:And so it starts... by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Initially the robots are only just a bit cheaper than labour, so slow introduction and minimal price changes. But over time, they get better and cheaper, until anyone that still relies on labour will not be able to compete.

      Most of the cost is software, once you have a working system the money is in volume. Right now it's going real slow but once you have say 1% self-driving cars on the road and they're starting to look at cash-positive margins you'll see a huge and quick ramp-up with entire fleets switching. Same thing with big chains with tens of thousands of outlets, either it's just a subsidized experiment/R&D/trial project or it'll be massive. It's just in the nature of working on a common system, it either works for almost nobody or almost everybody. That in between period will pass awfully quick compared to a human's career expectations.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    36. Re:And so it starts... by mysidia · · Score: 1

      It will translate to lower consumer prices over time Versus hiring human workers for the roles.

      It's a shift that is being accelerated by economic incentives in the form of higher minimum wages for human workers. The minimum wages being forced higher for human workers make it necessary to either automate or raise prices for these companies to survive, But consumers don't want to pay the higher prices, so they'd lose business and maybe become non-profitable ---- the automation will allow fast food to continue to be a business that exists, maybe.

    37. Re: And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple: we eliminate that underclass. They would be in no position to effectively revolt anyway. Nobody is.

    38. Re:And so it starts... by lgw · · Score: 1

      And if we're all the "robot owners"?

      With basic necessities removed from the economy, There will still be plenty of work. What percentage of the current economy is basic necessities, do you think? Heck, a third of us will likely be involved in providing hands-on medical and elder care at the peak of the Boomers dying off. Most of what I spend money on is for mild luxury - stuff beyond basic necessities. And I don't care for status symbols - most people do. Anything a robot can make can't be a status symbol - that entire section of the economy will remain untouched.

      Plenty of use for money.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    39. Re:And so it starts... by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Perhaps... But automation has been "replacing" workers for centuries. Marc Brunel mechanised pulley block making in the early 19th century, and water and wind power replaced manual labour for grinding grain at least 2 millennia ago. In the 19th century, increased mechanisation increased production rate so much that the need for workers increased dramatically.

      Increased automation led many to speculate that we would have a shorter working week and spend more time on leisure.

      Things are different now, so perhaps you're right. I want you to be right! But I'm a little sceptical just because previous productivity improvements haven't achieved this.

    40. Re:And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good link, thanks.

      Not so sure about Manna, it takes some real intelligence to do that. But monitoring people think of call centers.

      As to vision, already done, and for $500 machines, not $500,000 machines. Not human level, but good enough for many tasks.

    41. Re:And so it starts... by Tyr07 · · Score: 1

      But those items are actually getting cheaper production wise and individually the prices are quite inflated.

      Large fast food chains also have significant influence in the food production industry and manipulate prices so that you get a better "deal" by eating at the fast food places. In addition, fresh real food vs processed flash frozen stored product. You go to the grocery store and purchase fresh hamburger. It's not the same product that is being sold in a fast food place.

      Far more expensive? Like what? That coke you got with your meal that's 3$ on it's own? For the 1 cent cola?
      Prices in fast food are going up in Canada at least. You could buy a burger for 1.35-1.50, it's now up to 2.00$. They'll keep pushing, get some resistance, back off, once people get used to it, up it again.

    42. Re:And so it starts... by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Not so much the need for universal basic income. But the need to change education with more math, science, art as well more liberal arts studies.
      The jobs of the future may not need college degrees but they will need to take advantage of the humans ability to improvise think on their feet and be creative. The education system has been fighting creativity for generation and now it is producing useless workers. As the current education system was made for the budding industrial economy where people were able to read and comprehend tasks they need to do and have enough math skill to not get cheated.
      Today we need smarter people and let the robots do the drugs work.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    43. Re:And so it starts... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Cheaper doesn't mean shit if you don't have any money. It's no more useful than giving income tax cuts to people who have no income.

      The brutal truth of it is that if you want people to buy your products, you're going to have to ensure that they have money to buy them with, If you're not going to hire them and pay them, then you're going to have for provide them with money some other way or simply stop using the exchange of money (or equivalents) for product.

      It's like the old-time Dark Satanic Mills. One factory belching pollution is a local nuisance, but when you have thousands of factories, it's a menace. So also with one employer laying people off versus EVERY employer laying people off.

    44. Re:And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get rid of government laws, rules, income and wealth taxes, government controlling money and manipulating interest rates, redistributing income and property, under those conditions you will have a working economy. Otherwise you will have war.

      Autoquack #23174. no-think is goodthink. Big Brother approves and will laud you on his radio program.

      It's not like all those laws and regulations were passed because unregulated companies were abusive to individuals or other companies. The benign behaviour of unregulated corporations is a historical fact right up there with the fact that we've always been at war with EastAsia and allies of EurAsia.

      No, those commerce-killing regulations were simply a naked power grab by Freedom-hating groups who want to see America fail!

    45. Re:And so it starts... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      We're not all going to be the robot owners. Robots are capital, and the trend of the last 30 years has been to push more and more of the capital upwards and away from the 99%.

      Yes, robots will get cheaper, too, but cheap isn't free and if we continue laying off people faster than they can amass capital to buy their own robots, then the magic isn't going to happen.

      Nor are a lot of us suited for the limited set of jobs that are expected to remain - and I should note that Japan has expended considerable effort on robotic care for the elderly (thanks to a shrinking lower-age population), that IBM's Watson is considered a first-class medical expert in its own right, and that robot surgery has been out of the realm of Science Fiction and part of everyday reality for some years now. So that wasn't the ideal example of where the newly-unemployed can retrain for a new source of capital.

      Historically, new occupations have been spawned when older occupations died, but we're simply not seeing anything new open up on a major scale this time. What? You think that Robot Repair is going to be a growing field? We ALREADY have technology sufficient for a simple robot to roll up to a more complex one, unbolt a failed component and attach a new one, then roll over to the dumpster with the old one. Nobody's going to be tinkering with fine-grained repairs any more than they repair the electronics on a digital watch or TV. It's simply more cost-effective to get a new unit from the factory and scrap the old one.

    46. Re:And so it starts... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      The computer was extremely progressive! Digital IC logic, real-time priority-driven RTOS, complete digital autopilot...

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    47. Re:And so it starts... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      No one has to eat at a place that makes food with robots.

      Frankly, I prefer a hand-smashed burger and a baked on the spot bun.

      I do business with these places because they produce a superior product.

      That's nice, but the only fast-food place that I know of around here that claims to bake buns on the spot (or at least on-premises) is Subway, and I've always thought that Subway buns are horrible. Besides which, they may be baked locally, but the bulk of production is done elsewhere.

      I'd rather have a sub made on the supermarket buns at Firehouse.

      Even the ethnic restaurants don't generally produce their own bread - there are a handful of Arabic bakeries in town and they supply the fast-food trade, and tortillas are probably coming in from out of state.

      As with software, Fast, Quality and Inexpensive are mostly exclusive options. These days, however, we're not given enough lunchtime to avoid Fast, and we're conditioned to expect The Low Price Always in 21st Century USA, so guess where that leaves Quality?

    48. Re:And so it starts... by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 1

      >We'll be fine like we always have been.

      Just like the dinosaurs were fine for 100 million years, until they wern't.

    49. Re:And so it starts... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Even if the Mercury vehicle wouldn't have worked without one additional person doing some manual checking, which is highly implausible because of how the laws of physics work, John Glenn didn't land on the Moon or even try landing on the Moon.

      I'm not certain what your argument is. I merely pointed out that you and the other guy are both correct, but not talking about the same thing.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    50. Re: And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "... let the robots do the drugs work." Why would we need robot pushers?!?

    51. Re:And so it starts... by lgw · · Score: 1

      Ah, but my premise is "instead of universal basic income, let's have universal basic robots". I expect small-scale manufacturing to follow the arc of laser printers in any case.

      Nor are a lot of us suited for the limited set of jobs that are expected to remain

      Very few people farm or manufacture (though there are over a million skilled manufacturing jobs that can't be filled right now, for lack of skilled applicants). But there's always new work to be done - work that needs to be done a little bit differently each time, from handyman work to beauty salons. Plus all the yet-to-be-invented jobs customizing what the robots spit out for social status. Not software dev jobs, but jobs requiring a bit of creativity.

      Unskilled jobs will vanish, but almost everyone can be good at something, given the chance.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    52. Re:And so it starts... by The-Ixian · · Score: 2

      How does one operate private property? Am I holding it wrong?

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    53. Re:And so it starts... by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Ultimately, it'll break capitalism, assuming that Congress doesn't step in to make laws preserving it (i.e., banning excess of automation).

      Or, something unforeseen will cause new jobs to open up. A hundred years ago most jobs were agricultural and they have mostly be abandoned and manufacturing jobs took their place and when manufacturing started to go away, other jobs opened up in other fields. the future always seems to be able to throw a wrench into what people think will happen.

    54. Re:And so it starts... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      The sentence I responded to started with "We landed on the moon because...". There's a number of answers I could come up with for this but some preliminary calculations (only problems of modest size were possible to solve using masses of humans with calculators) many years before the deed are definitely not on the top of my list of ideas for those answers. Either some hard problems having been solved, like F-1's design or AGC's design and programming, or large-scale project management techniques, or the overall politics of the whole thing are much more likely to be the relevant answers from my POV.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    55. Re:And so it starts... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      The sentence I responded to started with "We landed on the moon because...". There's a number of answers I could come up with for this but some preliminary calculations (only problems of modest size were possible to solve using masses of humans with calculators) many years before the deed are definitely not on the top of my list of ideas for those answers.

      We landed on the moon because of many reasons. Most of which kinda sorta had to mesh together to make the whole thing work. Some were more exciting than others, but all were important. I see no reason to make too many ranking distinctions.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    56. Re: And so it starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can get to the moon in 10 years, but UBI will take 20. It's an issue of political will, not an issue of solving the mechanics, which is trivial by comparison.

    57. Re:And so it starts... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      I don't want to sound cruel, but "new jobs will appear" isn't one of the basic laws of the Universe. Or, as they say on Wall Street, "Past performance is no guarantee of future results".

      Given capable enough automation, virtually any job can be automated, even hair styling (and I'll bet you'll find at least one automated styler project already if you do a web search, although obviously not yet a practical one). Even migrant stoop labor has been threatened as farm robots have been developed that can detect ripe/unripe produce and harvest items that were formerly too awkward or fragile for automation.

      You might think that even an automated hair styler at least needs someone to design new styles, but remember that "full service" is rarely an option these days. We're already accustomed to being unpaid gas pumpers (outside of a few states anyway), shoe shiners, grocery checkout people, and other things that used to be done for us by other people.

      It is true that manufacturing jobs are going begging, but a lot of that is because people stopped going into manufacturing once the bulk of the jobs went offshore. When they come back,they're highly automated, and likely to become moreso, so many of us consider manufacturing as yet another occupation whose long-term security is doubtful.

      Handyman? We like in a world where literally "Ending is better than Mending" and have been increasingly so for decades now. It costs more to repair than to replace.

      I too believe that everyone can be good at something, but the question is whether that something will earn a living. Even as it is, hair stylists tend to run the bottom of the wage scale.

      I hope for the best, but we have no assurance we'll get it, so it's prudent to consider the worst and what we might do to avoid it.

    58. Re:And so it starts... by lgw · · Score: 1

      new jobs will appear" isn't one of the basic laws of the Universe

      All we have to go on in any kind of reasoning about the universe is what we can observe. Every time in the past it seemed like all the jobs would vanish, and for the most pert they did, to be replaced by new jobs. It's happened over and over since the 1600s, and we understand why it happens - the old stuff gets cheap and people want more, different stuff. It may not be general relativity, but it's pretty solid.

      iven capable enough automation, virtually any job can be automated, even hair styling

      Sure, but people, for the most part, want some human interaction. That's not likely to change in the area of beauty salons and spas. The advice is half the experience.

      And that's IMO the core of the new jobs - if everything is cheap and easy to get, what will make you look trendy, fashionable, etc.? A group to belong to, followed by social status, are next on Maslow's hierarchy of needs one the basics are trivial to provide for, and jobs in those areas will only grow. This is quite fundamental to human nature, as best we can study it.

      Handyman? We like in a world where literally "Ending is better than Mending" and have been increasingly so for decades now. It costs more to repair than to replace.

      Who mounts the new flat-screen on the wall? Who replaces that failing ceiling fan? Most the 20-somthings I know can't even change a tire these days; don't even own basic tools. And the Boomers, who were quite handy, are getting to the point where they need help.

      I hope for the best, but we have no assurance we'll get it, so it's prudent to consider the worst and what we might do to avoid it.

      Starting with yourself and your family, I hope. Abstract political discussions are easy, but you can directly affect those close to you.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    59. Re:And so it starts... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      All we have to go on in any kind of reasoning about the universe is what we can observe. Every time in the past it seemed like all the jobs would vanish, and for the most pert they did, to be replaced by new jobs. It's happened over and over since the 1600s, and we understand why it happens - the old stuff gets cheap and people want more, different stuff. It may not be general relativity, but it's pretty solid.

      I could just as easily say that because the last 99 times I flipped a coin it came up heads that I can expect the 100th time to also come up heads. That's not a law. A law is provable. All that's provable here is a pattern, and patterns often break. There's something missing this time. Always before when jobs were destroyed, the replacement jobs were already known. Automate a loom? Need loom mechanics and operators. Replace human computers with electronic computers? Need operator, programmer, service engineer.

      What new jobs are being created right now? You keep suggesting existing professions and low-paying ones at that. The 20-something Geek Squad person who hangs your flat-screen TV isn't a general-purpose handyman. It's someone who's been given a minimal amount of training to do a set job and is paid accordingly. It's not even expected to be a "real" job with life-long growth. One reason why few own or use basic tools is that so many jobs these days now employ special equipment. Even replacing a car battery often requires equipment rarely found in the home garage.

      In short, employment growth hasn't been what we've been seeing over the last 20 years, it's been slow shrinkage, both in positions available and in remuneration.

      I also expected to see more people willing to pay for personal service, but I lost faith in that. The increasingly-poor segment of the populace can't afford to and the wealthier ones shop at Wal-Mart and use self-checkout even though they don't need to do either one. We presently don't value the human touch as much as we need to in order to put masses of people to work - quite the contrary. Nobody keeps servants any more - even the well-off generally make do with nothing more than an occasional visit from the Maid Brigade.

      I present a pessimistic scenario, I agree, but history is full of events where people blithely assumed that tomorrow would work out the same way yesterday did, and paid a heavy price for it.

    60. Re:And so it starts... by lgw · · Score: 1

      I could just as easily say that because the last 99 times I flipped a coin it came up heads that I can expect the 100th time to also come up heads

      You damn well should expect it to come up heads. The odds are overwhelming that it's not a fair coin. Feynman may have used that exact example when discussing how experiment trumps hypothesis.

      That's not a law. A law is provable.

      A law is a theory that can be expressed tersely. Theories don't grow up to become laws. Nothing is science is "provable" in the sense of mathematics: science isn't in the business of proof. It's in the business of predictive models, based on observation. The fundamental assumptions of science, which can be summarized as "induction works" simply cannot be proven - which turns out not to matter very much.

      Always before when jobs were destroyed, the replacement jobs were already known.

      Not true at all. No one saw that the automation of shoes and furniture (and the gradual automation of agriculture) would lead to a vast industry manufacturing cars. When the stuff that dominates your budget becomes instead cheap, people start buying stuff en mass that only rich people had before, or that no one could afford before.

      That's the pattern you're not seeing.

      What new jobs are being created right now? You keep suggesting existing professions and low-paying ones at that.

      Existing jobs expanding are what it's possible to suggest - anyone who can predict the wholly new markets stands to become quite wealthy and successful. (How many saw Facebook coming? Expanding free time was obvious, but the actual product?) But we can talk about goods and mostly services that only the rich are willing to pay for today that most people will be able to afford as everything else get cheap. And that's the key: automation makes existing stuff cheap.

      BTW, there's no reason to think new skilled blue-collar work will pay any worse than being a plumber - and if you think a plumber is cheap, you've never needed one in a hurry.

      the wealthier ones shop at Wal-Mart

      Say what now?

      Nobody keeps servants any more

      Not true at all - we call those people the upper class. They aren't very visible in America, but they're here. Maid services have enabled the middle class to avoid cleaning their own toilets, without needing a live-in maid, and will only become more common as automation makes other stuff cheaper. But that's at the bottom as far as skill needed, my point is that "services that professionals can afford to hire" will move up the skill ladder, creating many more such jobs.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  4. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    These are garbage repetitive jobs, they should be automated. Sucks about the people that did this for a living, but maybe they could get a skill set that's harder to automate.

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

      Maybe they can just die in the gutter instead - they have no further use

    2. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      are there no prisons?! are there no workhouses?!

    3. Re: Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could fight to the death for our amusement in a large Battle Royale.

    4. Re:Good by Daemonik · · Score: 1

      There's always Soylent Green.

  5. Machine by Kohath · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is there a machine that washes the dishes? That would be news.

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

      Is there a machine that washes the dishes? That would be news.

      There is! Robots that wash dishes are called dish washers

    2. Re:Machine by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Whoosh

    3. Re:Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes that is the noise they make. It's the water jets inside.

    4. Re:Machine by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Hey, they don't load themselves or put the dishes away. That would be news.

    5. Re:Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have conveyor style dishwashers already. Wouldn't be too hard to make a version that can load and unload the belts. This is especially so when you deal with standard sized dishes.

    6. Re: Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. We have on in the kitchen. It's called a dish washer...

    7. Re:Machine by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Not much news, though. Just make racks to hold the dishes the same way you stack food baskets as you leave and make the racks deployable direct-to-dishwasher.

      Not that it matters. Fast food doesn't wash dishes anyway. It's disposable.

    8. Re:Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That brings up a subject not mentioned often in these discussions:

      A robotic restaurant will have to be cleaned often, especially every surface that gets touched by food. In a cureent restaurant this is done by the employees which are hopefully selfcleaning as well. In a fully automated restaurant you will either need staff for cleaning or build the robot so that it can do that itself. All in all, this will offer multiple opportunities to cut corners where it comes to cleaning and maintenance and for things to go horribly wrong. How about a burger with the subtle taste of degreaser or fries with a touch of hydraulic oil?

    9. Re:Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a restaurant without any dishes, McDonald's has a lot of stuff to wash by hand. They wash everything not nailed down from grease filters, to fry baskets, to the holder for salt and pepper shaker. Even if they had a dishwasher someone would have to load and unload it. I only lasted a couple of weeks there as a kid since I thought I would be doing something glamorous like flipping burgers, but instead got to wash a lot of non-dishes.

    10. Re:Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe they call it a dishwasher!

    11. Re:Machine by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      See... you need to work at Hardee's/Carl Junior.... they don't wash anything.... It's 100% glamorous burger flipping (followed by heat lamp storing)...

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    12. Re: Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe this is the point of the comment: it exists and doesn't fully remove the need for manpower

    13. Re: Machine by Kohath · · Score: 1

      The point was that automation at restaurants and in food preparation is not news. It's been happening for many decades -- centuries if you count using millstones powered by a water wheel to grind grain into flour. It's a good thing. Arguably, it's one of the best things to ever happen to humanity.

  6. Already in McDonalds by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 1

    I noticed that the local McD's has a beverage filler at the drive-through station which is an oval track holding 10 or so beverage cups, which proceed through what looks like a partially automated filling line.

    But this is really a progression rather than any new thing. We don't stop to think that the washing machine, the dish washer, and the answering machine took away a good many women's jobs.

    1. Re:Already in McDonalds by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm tired of the word "disruptive" being used simply because it sounds good in a pitch to VCs...

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re: Already in McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're being sexist there. All jobs are women's jobs.

    3. Re: Already in McDonalds by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Insightful

      All jobs are women's jobs.

      Well, sure, but these were primarily women's jobs at the time they were automated out of existence. "Washerwoman" is common parlance.

      Want to know what other woman's job got automated out of existence? Computer. Many women were computers. They were replaced by electronic computers. So replaced that you automatically think of a computer as a machine today, and "Many women were computers" sounds funny.

    4. Re:Already in McDonalds by mentil · · Score: 1

      The invention of the washing machine has actually been credited for the rise of Feminism, so many women would approve of not having to spend half of each day scrubbing clothes on a washboard.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    5. Re: Already in McDonalds by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      You're being sexist there. All jobs are women's jobs.

      Not "sperm donor".

    6. Re: Already in McDonalds by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      Referring to the history of the world is not sexist, slavery-ist, monarchist, communist, or any other -ist.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re: Already in McDonalds by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      You're being sexist there. All jobs are women's jobs.

      Not "sperm donor".

      Parthenogenesis will make that job obsolete soon.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    8. Re: Already in McDonalds by Jeremi · · Score: 3, Funny

      Not "sperm donor".

      I'm not sure that counts as a job. i.e. Working an 8-hour shift, 5 days a week would be difficult for most.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    9. Re: Already in McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your racist

    10. Re:Already in McDonalds by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      I get free drinks from McDs because it spits out too many. 10 instead of 1, last time.

      I realize the cost is negligible, but an occasional 10x error is not successful automation.

    11. Re: Already in McDonalds by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      You're utterly incoherent. The fact remains that mere referring to history, e.g. describing past events, ipso facto does not involve condoning or disapproving of these events.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    12. Re: Already in McDonalds by arth1 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure that counts as a job. i.e. Working an 8-hour shift, 5 days a week would be difficult for most.

      You haven't checked your e-mail lately.

    13. Re:Already in McDonalds by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

      The McDonald's drink robots have been around for years. They do a reasonably decent job and free up a person to pick orders.

      --
      Sig for hire.
    14. Re:Already in McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > They do a reasonably decent job

      They absolutely do not. They spray soda everywhere so someone has to wipe down the counter and the outside of each cup Every Goddamn Time before handing it to the customer, and orders are already typically handled by different employees so the time savings is moot. Moreover, there is neither setting nor blood sacrifice that will ever get the damn things to mix syrup with carbonated water without fucking it up somehow, and no amount of extra ice in the cup can mask how shit the machine is at making something approaching the drink on the label.

    15. Re: Already in McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is how long it now takes me every night... How I long for my 20's again.

      captcha: reflects

    16. Re: Already in McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its a Hard Job . . .

    17. Re: Already in McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not "sperm donor".

      I'm not sure that counts as a job. i.e. Working an 8-hour shift, 5 days a week would be difficult for most.

      It's tricky, but I'm game (for at least the first few hours).

    18. Re:Already in McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is why robots won't totally replace people, the poop-acolypse.

      https://www.facebook.com/jesse.newton.37/posts/776177951574

    19. Re: Already in McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Washerwoman" is common parlance.

      No it's not.

    20. Re: Already in McDonalds by greythax · · Score: 1

      Please don't feed the trolls. They are growing fat and powerful.

    21. Re: Already in McDonalds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My racist? My racist what?

  7. Americanisms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pies are pastry.
    Pizza is bread.

    There's really nothing more too it.

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

      So my chicago style deep dish flaky dough crust pizza is bread. I think not. But to each her own.

    2. Re: Americanisms by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      If it has chicago[sic] in the name it probably isn't pizza.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:Americanisms by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      Pies are pastry.
      Pizza is bread.

      Hot dog is a sandwich.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re: Americanisms by lgw · · Score: 1

      Unless it has chicago[sic] in the name it probably isn't pizza

      FTFY. If it ain't a pie, it ain't pizza.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re: Americanisms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    6. Re: Americanisms by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      If it has chicago[sic] in the name it probably isn't pizza.

      Chicago "Pizza" ia a whole loaf of bread with tomato sauce and cheese in it. I remember when bragging rights were how thick the layer of bread was. Yuck.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  8. Pizza is indeed a pie by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 3, Informative

    PIZZA is NOT a PIE

    You have simply never heard of savory pies. Pizza is one. Pies need not be sweet.

    1. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your Mom's pie is very savory, but she's more of a tart, really.

    2. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      They don't have to be sweet, most pies outside of the USA aren't sweet.

      They do however, have to be pastry. Pizzas are bread.

      So unless your definition of "pie" is "round cooked thing", then pizzas are not pie.

    3. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, as an Australian a meat pie is a normal everyday thing. But I agree that a pizza is not a pie, not sure how that got started, seems to be something from the good old US of A.

    4. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 0

      A pizza is also not a savoury pie. Using "pie" to mean pizza is almost as bad as, say, using the word "deuce" to refer to anything other than the playing card.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    5. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by DiSKiLLeR · · Score: 4, Informative

      THIS.

      In Austraila, New Zealand, and many other countries we have savory pries. I grew up on savory pies.

      But Pizza's ARE NOT PIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      They are not fully enclosed in Pastry. The closest thing that comes to that is a Calzone. An ordinary pizza is absolutely NOT a pie. You east coasters are just retarded.

      --
      You can tell how powerful someone is by the magnitude of the crime they can commit and be able to get away with.
    6. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pizza is more of a savory tart than a pie. Pies are typically made of pastry or bread fully enclosed but all pies have sides. Tarts are flat with things added on top. No sides, no enclosure.

      Pizza is a savory tart. A pizza tart.

    7. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So, pumpkin pie (or pecan, or any other pie without a top crust) is not pie?

    8. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why I love my low carb pizzas. Scrape all the cheese, sauce, and toppings into a bowl. Toss the bread.

    9. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Tell that to my 1932 Ford Coupe!

      (Yeah, I wish...)

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    10. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 1

      A "deuce" is a 1932 Ford. All other uses f the word are heresy. Milner said that.

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    11. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but in Australia venomous animals are also a normal everyday thing.

    12. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Informative

      Strictly, it's a tart.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    13. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I blame that incredibly annoying song by (I think) Dean Martin.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    14. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Hair pie isn't "pie "either; what's your point??

    15. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      Exception: Chicago style stuffed pies. Crust, 'toppings', another crust than actual 'toppings'.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    16. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Pizza crust is a flat-bread, like "pitta" or "pita".

    17. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, pumpkin pie (or pecan, or any other pie without a top crust) is not pie?

      That is correct. A filled pastry shell that is not covered on top is not a pie: it is a tart.

    18. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      While I do not agree what a pie even normally is fully enclosed, it clearly is not a pie. Meat pies exist, and I see no reason to not call them pies. But a pizza is flat. It has a completely different shape and crust, and its toppings are completely unlike any sort of pie filling ever used. While I think you could make a pie with a bread crust, or a pie with pizza flavored filling, a pizza has no similarities to a pie, there is not one feature of a pizza that is shared with a pie.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    19. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So should I call Pop-tarts Pop-pies?

    20. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      They are not fully enclosed in Pastry.

      Hmm, Pumpkin Pie isn't fully enclosed in pastry.

      Neither is chocolate meringue pie.

      Though Cherry Cobbler IS fully enclosed in pastry, and isn't a "pie"....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    21. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Funny

      Your Mom's pie is very savory, but she's more of a tart, really.

      Have you been pecan in on us again?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    22. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by lgw · · Score: 1

      When I was young and worked at a pizza place, we made pies, dammit. Very thick, with a layer of bread on top. Thin pizzas are one variant, sure, but at one time, even pizzas without a cover had the edges of a pie - the crust at the outside went up because the pizza was made in a deep pan, not a flat grill.

      IMO certain chain restaurants ruined everything in the late 80s/early 90s by putting disgusting amounts of oil in the pan, so that rather than getting a nice firm crust, the bread was just sopping with oil. Nasty. As fatty foods became unfashionable, people started preferring pizza styles that couldn't be ruined this way, and pizzas cooked on a sort of grille, rather then a pan, became popular. I won't even speak of thin-crust pizzas: abomination.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    23. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your Mom's pie is very savory, but she's more of a tart, really.

      Have you been pecan in on us again?

      If that wasn't truly funny. I would say 'bad form man'. But alas it was in fact truly funny.

    24. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I invite you to travel to Italy and share your views on thin crust pizza. Let me know how you get on!

    25. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pizza is a bread. The definition comes from the type of dough used.

    26. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

      > I blame that incredibly annoying song by (I think) Dean Martin.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      When the moon hits your eye like a big pizza pie, that's amore

      --

      I'm not repeating myself
      I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    27. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Scarletdown · · Score: 2

      The important thing to remember though is that Pie R round, not square.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    28. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Not just animals. Is it safe to extrapolate that Australian meat pies are probably trying to kill you, too?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    29. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pizza: bread dough with toppings spread over it.
      Pie: pastry case (usually savoury short-crust or flaky) with ingredients inside.

      (or at least that is how they are defined in Australia).

    30. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 5, Funny

      > I blame that incredibly annoying song by (I think) Dean Martin.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      When the moon hits your eye like a big pizza pie, that's amore

      And when it comes to pass, that an eel bites your ass - That's a moray.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    31. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Pies do not have to be round. And they don't need to have pastry. I give you shepherds pie and cottage pie.

    32. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by dryeo · · Score: 1

      using the word "deuce" to refer to anything other than the playing card.

      What else do you call a two dollar bill?

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    33. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by ranton · · Score: 1

      There is only one thing a food needs to be to be considering a pie. And that is to be called a pie by a significant number of people. And pizza clearly meets that definition. Considering early pies were a mix of meat and vegetables, while fruit pies didn't appear for another 300 years, pizzas arguably have more in common with the original definition than what you would traditionally find in a bakery.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    34. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by anegg · · Score: 1

      Not all people on the east coast of the US call a pizza a "pie"; in fact, no one I knew in 40 years living on the east coast did so. First time I heard it used by someone I knew was 2 weeks ago, in Washington (not DC) (but the person was exNavy, and I don't know where he was originally from)

    35. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      But Pizza's ARE NOT PIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      They are not fully enclosed in Pastry.

      Pies are defined by their crusts. A filled pie (also single-crust or bottom-crust), has pastry lining the baking dish, and the filling is placed on top of the pastry but left open. A top-crust pie has the filling in the bottom of the dish and is covered with a pastry or other covering before baking. A two-crust pie has the filling completely enclosed in the pastry shell.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    36. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe that's why you're so fat.

    37. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by DeathElk · · Score: 1

      What's with this "oooh, Australia, deadly animals" bullshit? I live in the Australian bush, aside from the occasional snake and terrifying Drop Bear, there's really nothing here that deadly (unless you head north to Croc country). North America, on the other hand, they've got fucking BIG BEARS that'll tear you apart, and eat you ALIVE for fucks sake.

    38. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by David_Hart · · Score: 1

      They are not fully enclosed in Pastry.

      Hmm, Pumpkin Pie isn't fully enclosed in pastry.

      Neither is chocolate meringue pie.

      Though Cherry Cobbler IS fully enclosed in pastry, and isn't a "pie"....

      Pumpkin pie and, incidentally, sweet potato pie I would not consider pies... simply because I don't like either... (grin)

      My favorite is lemon meringue pie. I would argue that anything with meringue on top is considered a pie because the meringue is the top to the pie in place of the crust. Some would argue that this is a tarte, but tartes tend not to have meringue on the top, they just have the filling. Though meringue can be used as a filling for tartes...

    39. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by JoeZeppy · · Score: 2

      When the moon his your eye, like a big pizza. Aye, that's amore.

    40. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by lxs · · Score: 1

      Australia is terrible at naming baked goods.
      That's the country where they bake a fruitcake and call it a Bananabread.

    41. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by lxs · · Score: 1

      Small change?

    42. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by lgw · · Score: 0

      Pizza is American food, not Italian, as everyone knows.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    43. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TFA didn't say pizza is pie.

      It says someone is using a pie making robot to make pizzas.

      I can use my coffee machine to make steam milk doesn't mean my milk is coffee

    44. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that like a salad?

    45. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No pastry at all in a cottage pie or fisherman's pue

    46. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many pies do not have enclosed sides.

      Some things that have enclosed pastry sides are termed puddings.

    47. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Pies do not have to be round. And they don't need to have pastry. I give you shepherds pie and cottage pie.

      No love for Cumberland?

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    48. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      There is only one thing a food needs to be to be considering a pie. And that is to be called a pie by a significant number of people. And pizza clearly meets that definition.

      A subset of Americans doesn't constitute a significant number of people. A pizza is not a pie evidenced by the fact it is a pizza. Just because some people in one country call them pizza pies does not a pie make.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    49. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      A pizza is also not a savoury pie. Using "pie" to mean pizza is almost as bad as, say, using the word "deuce" to refer to anything other than the playing card.

      Well, excuse me while I go drop a deuce.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    50. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Hmm, Pumpkin Pie isn't fully enclosed in pastry.

      Yes it is. Pumpkin Tart, however, is open at the top. The same is true for a sweet potato tart. American English's rush to reduce the number of words is reminiscent of Newspeak.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    51. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I'm going to plunge the world into chaos here. What about flans?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    52. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

      American English's rush to reduce the number of words is reminiscent of Newspeak.

      Ahh, you're one of those who believe that his own variant of the result of "Norman men-at-arms trying to make dates with Saxon barmaids" is the Only True English.

      Sorry, doesn't work that way outside your own head(s).....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    53. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

      I give you shepherds pie and cottage pie.

      Thanks very much.

    54. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How in the fuck did an obvious offtopic troll manage to get moderated +5? Maybe it'll correct itself today and was just a weekend fluke; but god damn! There's no saving the site when the moderators rank up clear and obvious shit. Some other "mis-mods" I've seen are subjective and can be explained by mods letting their opinions get in the way of providing a service. While this shouldn't happen either, these tend to get cleaned up through others moderating, or through meta-moderation. This shit though....there's no excuse for it getting a +5 Informative. That's mods being funny...which breaks the whole fucking system. Grow the fuck up you little shits!

    55. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thin crust pizza is the best. The ingredients are what makes the pizza for me. The crust is just filler, no matter how 'perfect' it may be. The crust is just like the bread on a sandwich, to keep it together and fill you up. Except certain types of fresh bread can actually taste great on their own, while pizza crust is just bland.

      Also, ever since traveling Europe, I strongly prefer pizza without the red tomato-based sauce. Garlic, olive, and other white pizza sauces are so much better.

    56. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Good point and why we now call the $2 coin a tooney (2 loonies) here.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    57. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know you're joking, but consider this... Apple Pie really is English, not American.

    58. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      English is the only true "English" by definition, as it is the language spoken by the English. American English is often just called "American", for similar reasons. However, if you want to talk about Old English, and whether American or English is closer to it, then American English has the edge there. There's no ideal language called English, it's an ever-changing form with many dialects, however if you want to play semantics and apply labels, then the language spoken in England is English, the others are variants of it, descendants of the language spoken during the time of the British Empire.

    59. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by ausekilis · · Score: 1

      My mod points, they do nothing!

    60. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      What else do you call a two dollar bill?

      Rare, because you rarely come across them.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    61. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by dryeo · · Score: 1

      They were common in Canada before being replaced by the Toonie, which is also commonly used.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    62. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      I would do the opposite. The bread is the best part of any meal. And pizza bread is among of the most exquisite of breads...

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    63. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      They're nowhere near as common on this side of the border. This article explains why:

      https://infogalactic.com/info/United_States_two-dollar_bill

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    64. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno, ask your mom. She gave me the idea a few weeks ago when she cooked me dinner. After amazing sex of course.

    65. Re:Pizza is indeed a pie by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      While I think you could make a pie with a bread crust, or a pie with pizza flavored filling, a pizza has no similarities to a pie, there is not one feature of a pizza that is shared with a pie.

      Only Chicago-style "deep dish" pizza is "rightly" called a "pie". Out here in California, we [predominantly] have flat pizzas which are just called pizzas. And then there's the doughy, fluffy mass-market pizza sold by literally every large chain, which is still more like the California style.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    66. Re: Pizza is indeed a pie by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      To be fair, North America has many types of bears, some of them are quite docile and not something to concern yourself with. Brown bears are usually friendly, though you don't want to approach them. Black bears are often ok to be around, but can turn violent. Grizzly and Polar bears are terrifying killing machines though, I don't recommend being around them ever.

      Australia deadly animals thing is because Australia has more deadly venomous creatures than the rest of the world combined. If we talk about non venomous creatures, I would probably point to Africa being the scariest continent for that. Lions, tigers, hyena, hippos, so many creatures there would eat you without a second thought.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  9. Hopefully it does not end like this... by skids · · Score: 4, Insightful

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... ...sad that idiocracy may eventually be viewed as a documentary.

    1. Re:Hopefully it does not end like this... by D00MSlayer · · Score: 2

      Eventually? It already is.

  10. Better food and safer food? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With human element out of the picture food could be more consistently made and no food contamination cause by human laziness and error. Current kitchens are designed for humans to operate but I could see more of a vending machine kitchens replacing all that. I can't wait for vending machine pizza or ramen.

    1. Re: Better food and safer food? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They already have vending machine ramen and vending machine pizza. I've tasted both. They both currently suck.

    2. Re: Better food and safer food? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No risk of getting HIV from the afro-americans... sounds like a win.

    3. Re:Better food and safer food? by aXis100 · · Score: 1

      Someone still has to clean the machine, which has lots of moving parts to get fouled and crevices for bacteria to live in.

      Sure, it doesn't use it's phone while it poops, but you wont eliminate contamination.

    4. Re:Better food and safer food? by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      One thing microprocessor technology was done is vastly simplified mechanical construction. Stuff that used to involve racks of gears and cams got replaced by simple servo-motor mechanism. Stuff that can be sealed permanently because it doesn't have many wear parts and when it goes, you just replace the whole sealed module. Because mass manufacture is cheap, but diagnostics and repair are not.

      Arguably food-preparation equipment can be designed to require minimal cleaning effort by automated cleaning robots and undoubtedly do a better job that most restaurants do by hand.

      So don't hold out hope on that account.

      I'm just waiting for the day when self-driving trucks arrive at the back doors of Wal-Mart and pre-packed display pallets are off-loaded, moved into place and unwrapped by robots, no human intervention required. They'll probably even send sweeper robots through the store to collect any merchandise or small children that are found on the floor because the bean-counters computed that it's cheaper to sweep up and incinerate rather than pay for the more complicated robots that would re-fold items and replace them on shelves. Much less pay humans for that.

      Remember shoppers - it's ALWAYS the Low Price at Wal-Mart!

  11. its a white dragon. by nimbius · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This kind of tech has been around since the invention of the multifunction hot beverage machine. It grinds beans, steeps coffee, blends creamer and such to the users specification. theres not much special about extending this to fast food. mcdonalds has had pilot instances of french fry machines for more than a decade now.

    the trouble with these machines comes when capitalism rears its ugly head. hot beverage machines become brake-dust dispensers as the drive for profit leads to borderline rancid beans sourced from auction in a 50lb hopper. in the 21st century i cant think of a single person that would stuff 60 cents into one of these and expect a decent cup of black coffee (the arguable standard by which such a machine is judged to make other beverages.) Pretty soon ingredients like cheese are replaced with cheese topping, and other ingredients become dehydrated synonyms of their original embodiment. Automation of fast food is an excellent idea, so long as silicon valley understands that doing so further enables companies to cut costs and corners, ultimately delivering a mediocre product from an almost bankrupt franchise. McDonalds is the meat-space embodiment of this capitalism-until-death model, with kiosks to place orders and automatic fry droppers and ten pound caulk guns filled with toppings shipped four thousand miles across the country. Maybe companies will realize customers dont embrace automation if the machine is flipping garbage, but the continued existence of the 'hot beverage' machine in my companies breakroom seems to suggest companies dont give a shit what customers want in an automated form factor.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:its a white dragon. by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      Of course, the flipside is that it enables companies to offer customers the choice of 30% more expensive ingredients for the same cost, or having a human to serve it.

    2. Re:its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They already get humans to eat poison. It's a lost cause already.

    3. Re:its a white dragon. by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Why would you buy such shit? I'd rather go home and fix a peanut butter sandwich than eat that fucking slop at McD's and some of the other fast "food" chains. As fast food has raced to the bottom I can't believe people still buy it. I did notice the local chic-fil-a had cars all the way around it in two drive thru lines while the McDonald's across the street had two cars in line. I imagine they were pacifying the kids with a happy meal/toy.

    4. Re:its a white dragon. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      This kind of tech has been around since the invention of the multifunction hot beverage machine. It grinds beans, steeps coffee, blends creamer and such to the users specification

      Now that you mention it, why does the coffee that comes out of those automated multifunction hot beverage machines always suck so bad?

      I mean, the machine is grinding the beans, the water is probably filtered, it's got to be a drip or pressure process. So why does it always taste like ass? Are they stretching the coffee beans by adding sawdust?

      I would think that there's got to be a way to make automated beverage machine coffee taste really good, but for some reason, it never, ever does.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you buy such shit? I'd rather go home and fix a peanut butter sandwich than eat that fucking slop at McD's

      Clearly, you have never had a McRib. Chomp!

    6. Re:its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm reminded of Austin where there is a Chick-Fil-a catty-corner from a McD's. The Check-Fil-a has their drive throughs (plural) backed up into the street and had to completely raze and build their store from the ground up to handle the traffic demand. The McD's? Usually empty.

    7. Re:its a white dragon. by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      That flipside is a marketing fantasy. They would sell shit on a stick and call it premium quality, if they could get away with it and they already do with so many products. Trusting corporations based around nothing but greed is truly foolish.

      Automation, never forget how earth moving equipment replaced the truly hard labour of millions. The problem lies in the false claims of 'ownership' of all the resources of a country that are actually shared. Only insane greed, corruption of laws, allows extremes of violence to enforce a completely artificial economic construct, that has killed millions and will kill millions more.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    8. Re:its a white dragon. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Farnsworth: Actually, I can own property, but I'm not a penny less hippy.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    9. Re:its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He had found a Nutri-Matic machine which had provided him with a plastic cup filled with a liquid that was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea. The way it functioned was very interesting. When the Drink button was pressed it made an instant but highly detailed examination of the subject's taste buds, a spectroscopic examination of the subject's metabolism and then sent tiny experimental signals down the neural pathways to the taste centers of the subject's brain to see what was likely to go down well. However, no one knew quite why it did this because it invariably delivered a cupful of liquid that was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea.

      (Later)

      “No,” Arthur said, “look, it’s very, very simple. All I want is a cup of tea. You are going to make one for me. Now keep quiet and listen.”

      And he sat. He told the Nutro-Matic about India, he told it about China, he told it about Ceylon. He told it about broad leaves drying in the sun. He told it about silver teapots. He told it about summer afternoons on the lawn. He told it about putting the milk in before the tea so it wouldn’t get scalded. He even told it (briefly) about the East India Trading Company.

      “So that’s it, is it?” said the Nutro-Matic when he had finished.

      “Yes,” said Arthur. “That is what I want.”

      “You want the taste of dried leaves boiled in water?”

      “Er, yes. With milk.”

      “Squirted out of a cow?”

      “Well in a manner of speaking, I suppose”

      “I’m going to need some help with this one.”

      https://youtu.be/eAswvg60FnY has a cartoon mostly based on the same.

    10. Re:its a white dragon. by Gussington · · Score: 1

      seems to suggest companies dont give a shit what customers want in an automated form factor.

      Automation allows things to be produced more cheaply, for markets that are price sensitive. If you prefer quality, this option will also exist (as they do now).
      Example: I went to a hipster bakery on the weekend and the line was down the street to buy $7 loves of sourdough. It cost more, but it was awesome, and many people are happy to pay that for quality.

    11. Re:its a white dragon. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Of course, the flipside is that it enables companies to offer customers the choice of 30% more expensive ingredients for the same cost, or having a human to serve it.

      This should be at +5 funny or something. It doesn't work that way.

      In fact, elimination of almost all labor will be a very bad thing once it happens. If say, McDonalds eliminates every job but the store manager, the stakeholders will have an involuntary orgasm. Then 3 months later, oh-oh, What do we get rid of now to increase profits? Last time I checked, Their customer base was old folks and people with kids. Neither group is all that concerned about the expensive ingredients. So I suspect that indeed, without the bogeyman of labor costs, the food will be the next thing to suffer.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    12. Re:its a white dragon. by adolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe crap beans, maybe just old beans that are open the atmosphere. Maybe poor servicing.

      Any coffee snob will tell you that beans go bad within minutes/hours/days of roasting (depending on snobbery level).

      As to servicing, there's only one or two commercial vendors for this stuff in this region. The coffee I get from these machines is always consistent and OK if from a machine that sees real volume and regular servicing (ie, fresh food is vended from the death wheel beside it, and coffee-drinking factory/commercial workers have no other source for coffee during their 8-hour shift).

      This, contrasted with other coffee: I used to get a cup of coffee and sometimes a snack every morning before my work commute, always at the same place (which was the only place between my house and the highway).

      Usually, the coffee was fine -- no it wasn't a delicacy of aromatics and fine notes, but functional and tasty. They sold plenty of it every morning, so it didn't hang around long. Sometimes, though, it just tasted like socks and was undrinkable swill.

      There was nothing wrong with their process: Rinse things out, use automatic Bunn burr grinder to put fresh grounds into a clean filter and filter-holder, install said filter-holder into coffee Bunn maker with giant warming vat with a spout, push button to add hot water (and coffee!) into giant warming vat. Not ideal, but not horrible, and it tended to keep oxygen away from the brewed coffee (which is always good).

      Then, one morning, the giant warming vat was empty, and I got to learn Socks Coffee happens.

      I asked the nice lady at the register if she could make more coffee, and she looked at me sternly like I was jabbing her with the pokey end of an umbrella and wheeled around the counter. She pulled the filter-holder from the machine, inspected it for a moment, saw that it was full of used coffee grounds, put it back in and pushed the "Brew" button to purposefully fill the warmer-vat with second-run coffee.

      Then she looked at me like, "Are you happy, now?"

      I put my morning snack down and never spent another dime there.

      Sometimes, people just don't give a shit -- whether with coffee-brewing machines, or any other aspect of life.

      There's no good reason for the self-contained vending machines to produce bad coffee, though it isn't all that difficult to have them produce rather good coffee -- either. It just takes someone behind the scenes who gives a shit.

    13. Re:its a white dragon. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Why are they spending extra on food now just because they have employees?

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    14. Re:its a white dragon. by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      It could also be the requirement of using water that is the wrong temperature. Something around 201F is what you want to brew with but who knows if that is what the machines use.

      The type of bean, how old it is, how it's been stored, the type of grind, the brewing technique, water quality, and water temperature all go into the quality of the brew. You know that for most machines the quality of the bean isn't going to be that great since you are buying a cheap cup of coffee. As for the rest I could only offer guesses. I would imagine that the grinder itself would be good as it would have to do a lot but I don't know if they are doing a fine grind or course. That would depend on the type of filter they are using and hopefully they have matched those.

    15. Re:its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is the head of capitalism so ugly? The pursuit of profit has provided all kinds of inventions that we take for granted. Practically everything I like about my life (and you like about yours) was a product of capitalism at work.

    16. Re:its a white dragon. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Why are they spending extra on food now just because they have employees?

      No. The probem is that every three months, they have to make more money. So after the labor costs are as close to zero, they will have to cut them elsewhere. And not only will they have to cut them elsewhere, the stakeholders will be expecting profit as big or bigger than the big bump they will get when getting rid of most of the labor.

      Which of course will not be possible. We've been programmed since the early 80's to look at the employee as enemy number 1 to be rid of at any possibility. So when the war is finally won, the victors will be at a bit of a loss for new targets.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    17. Re:its a white dragon. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      But we've already seen ingredient cost cutting and the result (Olive Garden). Sure, they'll try to find ways to engineer cheaper flavor, but I'm skeptical that a place like McDonald's is going to get notably worse. The trend has been the opposite even.

      Certainly some chains will try to sell sawdust, but it already happens. FFS, Taco Bell wasn't even allowed to call their taco filling beef. The bottom of quality is being seeked out simultaneous to attempts to automate, but they are independent of each other for the most part (though there will perhaps be examples when a lower quality ingredient, or a less tasty one, is required for automation).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    18. Re: its a white dragon. by anegg · · Score: 1

      I think people will pay far above the basic cost of an item for a few items they consume (like the bread, or Starbucks coffee drinks), but most can't afford to do that for all of the things they consume. So various items can be had in an artisanal way, with people differing about what they are picky about.

    19. Re:its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't be fucking serious.

    20. Re:its a white dragon. by David_Hart · · Score: 1

      This kind of tech has been around since the invention of the multifunction hot beverage machine. It grinds beans, steeps coffee, blends creamer and such to the users specification. theres not much special about extending this to fast food. mcdonalds has had pilot instances of french fry machines for more than a decade now.

      the trouble with these machines comes when capitalism rears its ugly head. hot beverage machines become brake-dust dispensers as the drive for profit leads to borderline rancid beans sourced from auction in a 50lb hopper. in the 21st century i cant think of a single person that would stuff 60 cents into one of these and expect a decent cup of black coffee (the arguable standard by which such a machine is judged to make other beverages.) Pretty soon ingredients like cheese are replaced with cheese topping, and other ingredients become dehydrated synonyms of their original embodiment. Automation of fast food is an excellent idea, so long as silicon valley understands that doing so further enables companies to cut costs and corners, ultimately delivering a mediocre product from an almost bankrupt franchise. McDonalds is the meat-space embodiment of this capitalism-until-death model, with kiosks to place orders and automatic fry droppers and ten pound caulk guns filled with toppings shipped four thousand miles across the country. Maybe companies will realize customers dont embrace automation if the machine is flipping garbage, but the continued existence of the 'hot beverage' machine in my companies breakroom seems to suggest companies dont give a shit what customers want in an automated form factor.

      And this is the first step towards every restaurant being a Taco Bell.... (grin)

    21. Re: its a white dragon. by Gussington · · Score: 2

      I think people will pay far above the basic cost of an item for a few items they consume (like the bread, or Starbucks coffee drinks), but most can't afford to do that for all of the things they consume. So various items can be had in an artisanal way, with people differing about what they are picky about.

      That's right, but as long as there's a market for personal service, jobs for humans will still exist (eg training services which have exploded as a profession in the last 20 years). So I'm merely adding weight against the argument that automation will destroy us all.

    22. Re:its a white dragon. by No+Longer+an+AC · · Score: 1

      Fast food has always been garbage. It won't get worse with automation.

      Back in the '50s (or so I'm told) they hired "soda jerks" to serve people Coca Cola, but now we just fill our own 64 ounce Big Gulps at the convenience store.

      But what about the poor out-of-work soda jerk? Nobody thinks about him. Maybe he went to college and now has a job as a barista.

      I'm a bit skeptical of all the objections to automation. I've appreciated automation in my life. It makes things easier and cheaper. Maybe we should look at it as lowering the cost of living rather than putting people out of work.

    23. Re:its a white dragon. by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      > ingredients like cheese are replaced with cheese
      > topping, and other ingredients become dehydrated
      > synonyms of their original embodiment.

      And that's different from fast food as it already exists when assembled by humans... how exactly?

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    24. Re:its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. Most progress has come from deluded individuals who think they're doing the "right thing" by working hard for their bosses. I know many engineers and scientists who are completely deluded about who will truly benefit from their research and contribution. Many of them haven't recognised how much the system is geared against them, and how they are unlikely to truly benefit. Imagine you're a scientist who makes a breakthrough and wants to produce a product to sell to the masses to make their lives better? Despite your own delusions, you need to know that there is *no* way for that individual to do that without giving up most of what they have done: VCs end up owning most of the business, bank loans (if you can get them) end up draining you over time with interest, university "commercialization" outfits often come with stiff overheads (60% is not unusual) and at the end of the day, most researchers/inventors just sell their idea off to the highest bidder who is invariably paying well below full rate for the contribution. So no, capitalism means that those who have the capital can keep the capital and can buy up ideas at low prices and basically have a stranglehold on the entire system of production. This gets worse as things scale. Try opening a store and competing with Amazon? Much harder due to the size of that company, but imagine if Amazon was actually 1000 smaller outfits distributed around the country? There will be more competition and more of a local connection within the community. Basically, without going too far off track, there needs to be a legislated cap on the size of any one company, a legislated cap on the gross income any one individual can earn in a year, a legislated 100% death tax to eliminate accumulation of wealth in families, and a legislated cap on outright ownership of property. The very ethos that some people start life can own millions of times more "stuff" than other people is just wrong, and it's sickening to thing that our society tolerates it.

    25. Re:its a white dragon. by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      Well, are people drinking the cheap beverages in the break room? Companies don't up their quality standards voluntarily.

      See PC vendors. So many models from which to choose, and all of them are garbage. That includes the Macs, even if they aren't priced like they're garbage.

    26. Re:its a white dragon. by geekmux · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Why would you buy such shit? I'd rather go home and fix a peanut butter sandwich than eat that fucking slop at McD's and some of the other fast "food" chains. As fast food has raced to the bottom I can't believe people still buy it...

      And as greedy billionaires race to the top to become trillionaires who control this industry, it will be illegal for you to "go home and fix" anything.

      Greed will have its way, and this will be the end game. You might have noticed in our greed-fueled capitalistic society that the drive for more profits is absolutely unending.

      Corporations with hundreds of billions in cash reserves. Individuals with 10 times the money they could ever spend in a lifetime. Do you honestly think they're going to stop with the drive for more and more? Think their moral or political compass will suddenly reset? If we actually thought it would, we wouldn't be sitting here discussing how the greedy elite are buying robots to replacing humans as the "solution" to humans demanding an increase to minimum wage.

      UBI is the solution? Once automation and AI destroy the concept of human employment, don't think for a second trillioniares won't be lobbying to pay the unemployable masses any more than a welfare wage. The next wave of capitalism is writing itself to be the last one, all because of of the disease of greed.

    27. Re:its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      201F? Crazy. You know they have an actual international coffee brewing competition each year. They even post the method employed for by the winners, and almost always it's a combination of a French or Aeropress and 160F water.

    28. Re:its a white dragon. by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      I'm reminded of Austin where there is a Chick-Fil-a catty-corner from a McD's. The Check-Fil-a has their drive throughs (plural) backed up into the street and had to completely raze and build their store from the ground up to handle the traffic demand. The McD's? Usually empty.

      The chick-fil-a is busy in my town but so are all the mcdonalds. The mcdonalds near my house has 2 lanes constantly full while the burger king next door is usually empty. I've always found this strange because I've always thought Burger King had better food than Mcdonalds.

    29. Re:its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And who is going to thoroughly clean these crevice-filled machines? I can only imagine the bacteria farms that many of these machines must be, dispensing small quantities to every customer that comes through. Oh well, perhaps we'll build up immunity after time.

    30. Re:its a white dragon. by Apocryphos · · Score: 1

      The sooner we can get to the last wave of capitalism, the better.

    31. Re:its a white dragon. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I've always thought Burger King had better food than Mcdonalds.

      My cat eats better food than Mcdonalds.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    32. Re:its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you assuming the ingredient quality isn't already cut to the bone? How much does a pound of beef cost? Now how much does a quarter pounder with cheese cost? Even with volume discounts it is obvious that fast food can only be profitable using really cheap, low-quality ingredients.

    33. Re:its a white dragon. by Matheus · · Score: 1

      Not even "pilot" ... look behind the scenes at any given McDonalds and they are automating processes all over the place. There is plenty of human interaction still but they are slowly squeezing the humans into the smallest space in the process they can.

      Honestly I see all of this as a "Good Thing". The problem lies in how our society is slowly degrading the safety net that makes this "Good Thing" work for all. If we automate away all of the jobs that machines can do you *should end up with workers heading in 3 directions: 1) The people who make the machines. 2) The people who service / run the machines. 3) People who are not skilled enough to do either. In a society with a proper safety net that third category can survive on their (low but adequate) safety net and don't need to do some menial task to justify their sustenance pay. If they want more out of life they can strive to better themselves but I don't really care if someone instead chooses to sit around and do squat. It's their life to waste.

    34. Re:its a white dragon. by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      If this was how the world worked, we would all be eating sawdust by now.... oh... I see your point...

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    35. Re:its a white dragon. by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      Individuals with 10 times the money they could ever spend in a lifetime

      Well... to be fair, their dreams probably aren't big enough then.... I am thinking: personal space station or villa on the moon...

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    36. Re: its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't buy their products. Easy solution when there's competition.

    37. Re:its a white dragon. by geekmux · · Score: 1

      The sooner we can get to the last wave of capitalism, the better.

      The often used phrase Eat the Rich comes to mind.

      I wonder if that will be a necessary step.

    38. Re:its a white dragon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Douglas Adams, prophet, nailed it square on:

      The Nutrimatic Drinks Dispenser is a product of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation. The Guide has this to say on the Nutrimatic Drinks Dispenser:

      When the 'Drink' button is pressed it makes an instant but highly detailed examination of the subject's taste buds, a spectroscopic analysis of the subject's metabolism, and then sends tiny experimental signals down the neural pathways to the taste centres of the subject's brain to see what is likely to be well received.

      However, no-one knows quite why it does this because it then invariably delivers a cupful of liquid that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea.

  12. Make them work for "the rest of us" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The answer: rank robots by capabilities, tax them as virtural workers, pay proceeds into Social Security system

    1. Re:Make them work for "the rest of us" by Kohath · · Score: 1

      It will be really expensive when they get to 65-years old and start drawing checks.

    2. Re:Make them work for "the rest of us" by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      They'll be melted down.

      Soylent grey is robots!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:Make them work for "the rest of us" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and then the corporations will pass those tax costs onto the customers. Brilliant!

    4. Re:Make them work for "the rest of us" by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Great, through on another level of paperwork, reporting, and inspectors. It's very easy to do in some place like an auto plant where all of the robots are working the whole shift. Even then what do you do when one breaks down and misses a couple of days?

      But what do you do when you have a robot that only works when the volume requires it or the service it provides is only part of the working hours? Say I have a restaurant that is open 24/7 and I have a robot that cooks burgers. For ease let's say that there's six hours in the morning I don't serve burgers so the robot isn't active. And what is active for my burger cooking robot? If nobody has order a burger do I still have to pay proceeds because it's available? What about the six hours I don't serve burgers? The robot is still available to me then but it's just my choice not to use it. Now I have to track the hours that it's active and report it to the government. While my little restaurant might be easy to figure out if I'm cheating the system or not larger places won't be so easy so the government will need to do audits and have inspectors.

      Or are all robots going to be keeping track of the time that they are active and reporting it? To whom? Me, the government, both of us, to the manufacturer too? I'm sure the government would love to have the ability to just send out a bill without having a way to prove how it got to that number.

    5. Re:Make them work for "the rest of us" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or have it setup where if a company is or can be run efficiently entirely without human labor or with next to human labor, the government sets up a non-profit to handle making that product removing the company entirely from the system as the jobs for the people is the only real benefit said company gives to a company along with the taxes it pays.

      So without the workers bringing in an income or paying any taxes and all the proceeds going to just the top who then try to minimize their tax burden. At that point they no longer serve a function to the country they reside in.

      Once a company no longer requires workers, the country no longer requires that company.

      Either that or start trying a "Wealth" tax based no on the income they bring in but on their total estimated wealth each year and use that to fund everything. But you would have to have that tax rate get over 90% after a certain point possibly 99% if you start going into the tens of billions and so.

    6. Re:Make them work for "the rest of us" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh no... I would rather not melt a Check drawing robot that can live for eternity.

    7. Re:Make them work for "the rest of us" by mcswell · · Score: 1

      ...or collect unemployment checks:
      http://www.myconfinedspace.com...

  13. Welcome!! by monkeyman.kix · · Score: 0

    I for one welcome our new robotic overlords!

    Bring on the Pizza!!

  14. Education by mentil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Luckily all the high-school dropouts flipping burgers can just go to college and get a degree in liberal arts. Problem solved! They've lived so frugally over the years they surely must have enough money saved up to pay for that plus kids/rent while unemployed.
    Oh wait, no, maybe the solution is raising minimum wage? Oh, that'll accelerate automation you say? Hmm.

    Institutional unemployment is best paid for institutionally (free education) or else the problems will be paid institutionally anyway (crime, poverty, social welfare programs.) I knew someone who never went to high school because her broke parents were too poor to afford the $50/year fee; if that fee were waived, that $200 would've paid for itself many times over in reduced social welfare costs.

    As an increasing number of people are shuffled into a decreasing number of jobs, it'll lead to wage depression. Higher productivity will lower costs of goods and services to offset this somewhat, but lowered job security and making more people unemployable is a more serious price paid. The only winners here are those who own the means of production. Publicly available replicators or central planning are potential solutions. Nationalized real estate + basic income could work as well.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:Education by Hognoxious · · Score: 0

      The only winners here are those who own the means of production.

      Anything else would be cormanism!

      Or corbynism, I don't know. I say shit like "nookular" and "terrust".

      But I do know that it would lead to death panels and compulsory gay marriage, because my pastor said Jesus told him.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:Education by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      Education would only exacerbate the problem. It costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to train a human, and many many years. It takes a few minutes to teach a machine a lifetime of knowledge. The one thing thing that computers are most advanced from us is their ability to learn. So the more knowledge oriented the job, the easier it is to automate. Robots are still far away from being good are physical labor, but making a lawyer bot is in our ability today.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    3. Re:Education by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      making a lawyer bot is in our ability today.

      But what about the personality?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    4. Re:Education by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fundamentally, the US is going to have to decide which is going to cost more:

      Spending money for police, para-military units, prisons, weapons, in order to keep order in large areas of the country where people have zero hope, and some firebrand turns the dejected people into insurgents [1]. It will take constant work to keep order. This -does- work. Look at Syria.

      Spending cash on a UBI.

      Even with the fact that it might be cheaper to do private security like the Gilded Age with the Pinkertons being the corporate enforcers, as opposed to a UBI, there is also a cost that isn't visible. Paying for education and other expenses are like planting grain. You end up with a harvest of educated people who can not just compete in the global workforce, but who are competent at home for trade skills. The US seems to have an interest of "eating the seed corn, then wonder why there isn't anything growing in the fields."

      Then there is quality of life. It may not be something one can measure in a cash value, but being able to travel in a country without worry about IEDs or getting shot is a nice thing. A UBI can be the difference, especially if there is a major economic shift, between keeping a workable country versus having to fight insurgents in every single state.

      [1]: If people can't eat and are on the streets, rhetoric, no matter how toxic, will be ignored if it gives people the promise of food or a roof over their heads. Especially when there are no other options.

    5. Re:Education by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      But what about the personality?

      Excellent news on that front: lawyer robots have no lawyer personality.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    6. Re:Education by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I knew someone who never went to high school because her broke parents were too poor to afford the $50/year fee; if that fee were waived, that $200 would've paid for itself many times over in reduced social welfare costs."

      It's highly unlikely that it was only for want of $50 that prevented her from going to school.

      There are lots of other costs, like clothing, and school lunches, transport to and from school, exercise books and stationary, sports uniforms or music lessons + instruments, etc. It's probably more like $1000/year all up, not just $50.

      If the state had invested $1000/year, would it have been a good return on investment? Probably. But it's also 20 times more money than you originally proposed.

    7. Re:Education by Kjella · · Score: 2

      Institutional unemployment is best paid for institutionally (free education) or else the problems will be paid institutionally anyway (crime, poverty, social welfare programs.) I knew someone who never went to high school because her broke parents were too poor to afford the $50/year fee; if that fee were waived, that $200 would've paid for itself many times over in reduced social welfare costs.

      And instead she got to chill out for four years to save 15c/day? Sorry, I'm not buying it. Either they were so dirt-ass poor that she was doing paid or unpaid child labor to help the family like a third world country, in which case the fee is just the tip of the iceberg of lost income or they're crack addicts who can't keep two dollars in their pocket and wouldn't piss on their kids if they were on fire. There's just no way I believe that this fee was the only thing standing between her and a high school diploma.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    8. Re:Education by ancientt · · Score: 1

      Was that an "in Soviet Russia" joke?

      --
      B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
    9. Re:Education by Gussington · · Score: 1

      Luckily all the high-school dropouts flipping burgers can just go to college and get a degree in liberal arts. Problem solved!

      Or just push them into unskilled fields where automation is not easy/wanted. An example I thought of this morning is personal trainers. 30 years ago that job barely existed, and now every second person seems to be one. And people pay for a personal experience because a robot trainer simply would not work.

    10. Re:Education by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Where do you live that there's a $50/year fee on high school?

    11. Re:Education by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia, robot nukes you?

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    12. Re:Education by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      America. =/

    13. Re:Education by greythax · · Score: 1

      Respectfully, you have never been poor enough to have the proper perspective here. As a child, I remember quite well when having an extra $50 all in one lump sum at one time was an inestimable fortune. There comes a certain point where you reach total subsistence labor, no one will lend you more and you can't pay what you have borrowed, and every dime goes to keeping a roof over your head and food in your kid's mouth. Don't believe me? Take a look at the billions of people all over the world who live their entire lives like that.

    14. Re:Education by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Mmmm . .. the answer on the card is "Don't worry, there'll be a dial and if it gets too annoying you can turn it down a notch or too".

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  15. And if everyone replaces people with machines? by Mistakill · · Score: 1

    Who will have the money to buy fast food, iPhones, cars, movie tickets, etc? This sort of thing contributes to the decline of the economy, to the betterment of the company's shareholders...

    1. Re:And if everyone replaces people with machines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, you don't need to worry about that. We are designing machines that will purchase and enjoy all of those things and more, so you don't have to! Our machines will even take those pesky shareholders out of the shareholding business.

    2. Re:And if everyone replaces people with machines? by mlts · · Score: 1

      The Indians and Chinese, apparently... Microsoft has started to move their major conferences there, as opposed to the US.

    3. Re:And if everyone replaces people with machines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then be a shareholder

  16. Higher Minimum Wage push brings results! by I75BJC · · Score: 2

    It's amazing how an idea can affect us! The push to increase the Minimum Wage causes those businesses that need a low minimum wage to innovate. And the technology sector (that is, /.'s readers) is innovating. We /.-ers may want a higher minimum wage but we are systemically creating and refining technology to displace minimum wage workers even before the minimum wage is raised. We should be ashamed of ourselves! Actually, how funny the prideful superiority the average /.-ers display and the hypocrisy in manufacturing and distributing the actual opposite of their stated desire. How Funny! We are AssHats of the First Order!

    1. Re:Higher Minimum Wage push brings results! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      One could argue that this should have been automated as soon as it was technically feasible to do so, as it is exploitative to continue to use low wage workers in such a situation when there is technology available which can automate most of it.

    2. Re:Higher Minimum Wage push brings results! by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There are two minimum wages. One is a minimum the government sets for all employees to be paid and the other is the market minimum in which must be paid to attract and keep employees working under the conditions presented.

      The government minimum is largely static outside acts of government but the market minimum is largely moveable with unemployment. The easiest and best way to raise a minimum wage is to reduce unemployment and let the market for employees demand a higher wage. This is a problem however because the economy has crapped out so badly that fast food jobs are seen as careers now instead of first jobs and stepping stones on a path to bigger and better opportunities. The worst part of this problem is that instead of looking at the situation and saying we need more and better jobs, a lot of people are content outside of wanting to raise the pay for these menial jobs.

      When I got my first legal job (other than mowing yards and crap), unemployment in my area was low. I started at minimum wage but quickly progressed above it. All I had to do was basically show up on time and put a bit of effort at doing the work. My second job, which hired me away from my first employer at a raise, I went the extra mile for them and did pretty much anything they asked to the best of my ability and my pay quickly reflected it too. I was making 13 dollars an hour rolling burritos and flipping steaks on a charbroiler in the mid 1990s. $13 an hour might not seem like much but according to an inflation calculator one dollar in 1995 had about the same purchasing power as $1.56 in 2016. So in contrast, think of it as being paid almost $20 per hour in today's world and the minimum wage at then was $4.25 an hour (it went up from $3.35 when I first started working a few years prior).

      If employment was there, by necessity, the minimum wage an employer could pay to keep an employee would by higher than the minimum wage. Those fast food jobs would go back to first job experiences and as stepping stones for people to show they can show up to work and follow directions enough to be hired at someplace that pays more.

    3. Re:Higher Minimum Wage push brings results! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now all we need to do is automate you.

    4. Re:Higher Minimum Wage push brings results! by hambone142 · · Score: 1

      You are correct but no one wants to admit it.

      "Skill" is the differentiation between those who work for minimum wage and those who do not.

      My son was raised in a protective environment by his mother in a condo. Never given responsibility. Never allowed to pursue interests. Constantly monitored. He will have difficulty getting a fast food job due to his lack of simple people skills.

      At his age, I had already worked at a grocery store (a bagger) earning more than minimum wage. I sought electronics as a hobby and later got a job repairing TVs. Later, I worked for a consultant while attending college. All much above minimum wage. In the end, I put myself through school on the cheap (community college then state university) and became an electronics engineer for a long career.

      My son finally moved in with me a few months ago but he's totally unprepared for simple employment. Now, I get to try to kick start his skills, creativity and drive. Something I tried to do as a "every other weekend father" but really couldn't do with so little time with him.

      I wish him the best but it's not going to be easy.

      Again, skill makes the difference when a wage is paid. Those with little skill hand out fries.

      Now that minimum wage is headed upward, companies are circumventing the basic labor need with machines.

      Be careful what you ask for.

    5. Re:Higher Minimum Wage push brings results! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are two minimum wages. One is a minimum the government sets for all employees to be paid and the other is the market minimum in which must be paid to attract and keep employees working under the conditions presented.

      The government minimum is largely static outside acts of government but the market minimum is largely moveable with unemployment. The easiest and best way to raise a minimum wage is to reduce unemployment and let the market for employees demand a higher wage. This is a problem however because the economy has crapped out so badly that fast food jobs are seen as careers now instead of first jobs and stepping stones on a path to bigger and better opportunities. The worst part of this problem is that instead of looking at the situation and saying we need more and better jobs, a lot of people are content outside of wanting to raise the pay for these menial jobs.

      When I got my first legal job (other than mowing yards and crap), unemployment in my area was low. I started at minimum wage but quickly progressed above it. All I had to do was basically show up on time and put a bit of effort at doing the work. My second job, which hired me away from my first employer at a raise, I went the extra mile for them and did pretty much anything they asked to the best of my ability and my pay quickly reflected it too. I was making 13 dollars an hour rolling burritos and flipping steaks on a charbroiler in the mid 1990s. $13 an hour might not seem like much but according to an inflation calculator one dollar in 1995 had about the same purchasing power as $1.56 in 2016. So in contrast, think of it as being paid almost $20 per hour in today's world and the minimum wage at then was $4.25 an hour (it went up from $3.35 when I first started working a few years prior).

      If employment was there, by necessity, the minimum wage an employer could pay to keep an employee would by higher than the minimum wage. Those fast food jobs would go back to first job experiences and as stepping stones for people to show they can show up to work and follow directions enough to be hired at someplace that pays more.

      Kick all the unemployed people out of the country, problem solved. Someone get Trump on this, he'll Make Sandford Great Again.

      For The Greater Good.

    6. Re:Higher Minimum Wage push brings results! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      like where? Even educated people are complaining about no jobs, then the employed haves people say if you wanted to job you would clean floors to pay the bills, now cleaning floors and flipping burgers should be "temporary"(a month, a year, until debts is paid off? fat chance with a stagnant minimum wage) because magic job fairy will create entry level H.S degree jobs that pay "market minimum wage." Is fast food the domain of pimply faced kids as movies make it so? what about the retention efforts of McDonalds where they tout the worker to owner cycle? One can work YEARS in a fast food or min wage job until they find a new one, those years are not free until you get a grown up job, rent, healthcare, tuition/fees. A jobs a job, cleaner to manager. In our service based economy there needs to be people who serve. As we also have a large convenience economy there needs to be persistent workforce to do the grunt work doesn't mean that workforce has to scrape the bottom of the barrel to survive in some cases.

      Raise the min wage and oogey boogey, you lose your job to robots(happening already)
      Raise the min wage and we lose customers, look at cigarettes, people pay 10$ a pack for off label crap, people aren't going to go on a diet because a Nr 3 costs .75 more. The dollar menu will still be there. The people who can't afford mcdonalds now will still be unable to afford mcdonalds.

  17. World Hunger: Solved! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Place few of these machines in the most impoverished corners of this world. Instant gratification, the end of hunger and world peace with hundreds of burgers an hour, endlessly churning out of the back of the machine. It would be like resurrected Ilmarinen would have engineered the Sampo again, powered by an internal Jesus-core. Really.

  18. No, thanks. by Dracos · · Score: 0

    If I'm going to patronize a business in meatspace, I expect the experience to include at least one interaction with... meat (as in, an employee). This is part of the social contract that goes back to the beginning of commerce.

    As such, I detest self-checkout because as a customer I should not be expected to perform employee's duties without compensation.

    Likewise I plan to boycott fully automated restaurants. Wendy's and McDonald's have already begun to automate, so no more of them for me.

    1. Re:No, thanks. by iggymanz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      meanwhile the rest of us want timely service, properly cooked food, correct change...can't wait for robots to have the jobs.

    2. Re:No, thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least a surly robot that has had a bad day won't take it out on you by spitting in your berger.

    3. Re:No, thanks. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

      "As such, I detest self-checkout because as a customer I should not be expected to perform employee's duties without compensation.'

      Take the lead in solving that problem by always including beer or produce in your self-checkout. Then an employee will have to come over and help you anyway.

    4. Re:No, thanks. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      meanwhile the rest of us want timely service, properly cooked food, correct change

      Then why would go to a fast food restaurant?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:No, thanks. by lgw · · Score: 1

      Did you know that, in some places in the US, McDs is starting to offer table service? Same number of employees, just doing different work. Automation can also mean more meat-interaction, as humans are freed from some kinds of labor.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    6. Re:No, thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This is part of the social contract that goes back to the beginning of commerce."

      According to what? You just pulled this out of your ass. When do you think commerce began? Market economies are 3000 years old.

      As for the birth of modern economics, there's no such idea in Adam Smith.

      You abused the term 'social contract,' probably because you know jack shit about Rousseau. You're like an ignorant adolescent who misapplies words and ideas to sound impressive.

    7. Re:No, thanks. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      meanwhile the rest of us want timely service, properly cooked food, correct change...can't wait for robots to have the jobs.

      This has mostly been not true. Semi-automated restaurants have been tried many times. They tried phones at every table, so you can call your order in directly to the kitchen. Then they tried touch pads at every table. In general, these have not been popular. When they go out to eat, people want human interaction. Otherwise, they would just microwave something at home.

    8. Re:No, thanks. by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      wrong, no one want human interaction with restaurant staff. no one goes to a restaurant as an alternative to microwaving stuff at home, they have other reason to be there.

    9. Re:No, thanks. by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      how long before the cut the workers down to the $2.13 /hr tipped min wage.

    10. Re:No, thanks. by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      wrong, no one want human interaction with restaurant staff.

      AFAICT the only reason to go to a restaurant like "Hooters" is the interaction with the restaurant staff.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    11. Re:No, thanks. by adolf · · Score: 1

      I self-check produce all the time. Usually beer, too, without real interaction: They just look up at me, see that I'm *probably* old enough to their Dad, push the button, and go back to their Facebook game.

    12. Re:No, thanks. by MrLogic17 · · Score: 1

      Burger King tried that, oh, 10 years ago? It was simply a ploy to have fast food slower. Didn't work.
      If I'm going to a sit-down restaurant where I wait to get food, I sure as heck ain't choosing McDonalds.

    13. Re:No, thanks. by Xyrus · · Score: 1

      And millions of people will be unemployed, homeless, and very desperate.

      I seem to recall something like that happened in France a while ago. It didn't end well.

      --
      ~X~
    14. Re:No, thanks. by freeze128 · · Score: 2

      This also works if you purchase a gift card. It needs to be authorized by an employee.

      But if you don't want to use the self-checkout at the supermarket, that's fine by me. I get through the checkout 4 times faster than you because there is one line feeding 4 registers. If you're looking for the shortest line, be sure to divide the self-checkout line length by the number of kiosks.

    15. Re:No, thanks. by lgw · · Score: 1

      In many countries, McDs is a reasonable low-end sit-down restaurant, like the crap-on-the-walls restaurants in the US. I doubt they'll overcome their reputation to become that here, though Wendy's is trying - trying at least to move up to Five Guys and In-and-Out status.

      When I was young these were good places to eat, before the food cost optimization went crazy. Who knows, they could be again.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    16. Re:No, thanks. by twokay · · Score: 1

      They don't go there for an emotional conversation with the serving staff, but they do go there to be served (by a human)."Automated" restaurants will have have front of house staff still, but they will be able to cut the cooks and chefs by 50% or more.

      It will be like a lot of factories in developed countries are already. A skeleton staff making sure the machines are running and hitting reboot when something goes wrong. The box of cereal you buy creates more jobs at the retail end than production, and the customer has no idea there are now only 10 jobs back in the factory.

      --
      Wannabe nerd.
    17. Re:No, thanks. by cjjjer · · Score: 1

      fast food

      The answer probably lies within the question...

    18. Re:No, thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Then they tried touch pads at every table. In general, these have not been popular.

      Just to give you a contrary datapoint: touchpads are actually very popular at all-you-can-eat sushi restaurants. It's a way more efficient way to get a complex order in than to wait for your waiter to notice you, muck around with pen-and-paper and then forget parts of your order during the dinner rush.

      In many airports, you can order and pay for food with tablets in waiting areas. People use them all the time.

      Phone to kitchen is the wrong abstraction -- kitchen staff have no time to act as concierges. Tablets on the other hand do work.

    19. Re:No, thanks. by stdarg · · Score: 1

      The Target near me has had self checkout for a little while now, and they have a big stack of Target gift cards sitting right there. When you buy something that has a free gift card promotion, the computer tells you to grab a gift card and scan it, after which it's loaded with the correct amount.

    20. Re:No, thanks. by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      You could hire girls in miniskirt and halter top to walk around the automated restaurant, bending over and such, without serving food...and hooter's customer-types would be just as happy.

    21. Re:No, thanks. by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      3.5 million performing unnecessary task in the USA. there is no point to having unnecessary jobs, the USA could start making things again and outlaw "competing" with places that have no human safety considerations, as long as we support sweat shops and child labor and having no regard for human life of course we'll be hurt at home with unemployment

  19. Capitalist Class: How dare you tax our property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I can see a backlash to this approach. The capitalist class will say: We purchased these robots and they are ours. If you tax them, we'll shut down the business and go find something else to exploit. What they don't realize is if they build enough of these robotic based businesses, there will be nobody left to come.

    1. Re:Capitalist Class: How dare you tax our property by saider · · Score: 1

      This line of thinking is more of this Atlas Shrugged nonsense. As long as there is a reasonable profit, business will continue. After all, the government taxes other assets (such as the land/building) and companies have not decided to shutter their business or relocate en masse.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    2. Re:Capitalist Class: How dare you tax our property by roman_mir · · Score: 2

      companies have not decided to shutter their business or relocate en masse

      - they have not? :). They have not, you say? So that 500,000,000,000 dollar a year trade deficit that USA has been running for over 2 decades is due to influx of capital investment and of new business and it is not due to businesses leaving or shutting down? Interesting alternative reality you have constructed yourself there.

  20. A deuce is something you drop in the toilet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apt comparison to a FORD (Fix or Repair Daily) :)

  21. plan B make jail / prison cost so much that UBI is by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    plan B make jail / prison cost so much that UBI is cheaper. When people just start going in and out of the system just to get room and board then UBI looks like a better thing to do.

  22. The Ghost of Ned Ludd by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 3, Informative

    The folks with all the money realized a few decades ago: there's just too many people (as other than prostitutes and bodyguards, we don't need them anymore due to off-shoring, computerization and automation).

    But rolling the cattle trucks is a bit too on the nose, so let's go with Permanent War, sugar-based industrialized food, set them at each others' throats with race and religion-based hatreds, choke-off competent and well-funded primary education, and what the hell, add in the idea that vaccines are a bad idea.

    1. Re: The Ghost of Ned Ludd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget setting young men and women against each other via the judicious use of identity politics and social network fuckery. Then pretend to be bemused that 20somethings aren't having babies anymore.

    2. Re:The Ghost of Ned Ludd by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Don't be silly. Do you have no faith in human intelligence? What's that saying about fooling some of the people some of the time?

      If you did all that shit I'm sure somebody would notiÃé.,&@,
      no carrier
      .

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:The Ghost of Ned Ludd by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      there's just too many people (as other than prostitutes and bodyguards

      You might want to read up on the latest advances in sexbots and security robots.

    4. Re:The Ghost of Ned Ludd by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      Most companies want MORE customers, not less.

    5. Re:The Ghost of Ned Ludd by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      Most companies want MORE customers, not less.

      Well, they want more profit, not less.

      Traditionally more profit is correlated to having more customers, but if/when it becomes the case that these companies have to choose between more customers and more profit, they are going to choose the latter.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    6. Re:The Ghost of Ned Ludd by Gussington · · Score: 1

      The folks with all the money realized a few decades ago: there's just too many people

      The folks with the money? Ts the same secret society of reptilians that control the world?
      If you earn more than $33kyear, then technically you are one of those "folks". When are you going to give up your wealth to someone less fortunate?

    7. Re:The Ghost of Ned Ludd by MorePower · · Score: 1

      There is clearly something wrong with that article's math. There are about 300,000,000 Americans, out of about 7 billion people on Earth. Which means Americans are over 4% of the world's population. So even if the poorest American is richer than the richest non-American (obviously false) you would still have to be in the top 25% of Americans to be in the world's top 1%. So do you honestly think $33k per year puts you in the top quartile of Americans?

    8. Re:The Ghost of Ned Ludd by Gussington · · Score: 1

      So do you honestly think $33k per year puts you in the top quartile of Americans?

      No idea, but wouldn't dismiss it without further reading. If you take out all the kids and retirees, students, homeless people and prisoners then you'd probably get close to 50% (guessing here). So do half of those earn less than $33k?
      Also you not all income distribution is even, and you don't only have to be American, since other rich countries also have poor people.
      In any case I'd be happy to see more accurate figures if you have them, but wouldn't dispute it simply because it doesn't sound right.

    9. Re:The Ghost of Ned Ludd by elistan · · Score: 1

      It's best to look at wealth, not income, when deciding who belongs to the group of "folks with all the money." The person in the US making $33k/year likely is in debt - in fact, the article you link says "the typical U.S. household carries a whopping $70,000 in debt." To be in the top 1% globally, the article says one needs to have a net worth of $770k. Somebody in the US making $33k/year but holding $70k in debt likely has a decent standard of living but has absolutely zero power in ThatsNotPudding's scenario. (Please note I'm not commenting on the likelihood of the scenario in any way.)

    10. Re:The Ghost of Ned Ludd by Gussington · · Score: 1

      It's best to look at wealth, not income, when deciding who belongs to the group of "folks with all the money." The person in the US making $33k/year likely is in debt - in fact, the article you link says "the typical U.S. household carries a whopping $70,000 in debt."

      I agree with most of what you say, but given the choice of being born in the third world living on $10/day and a life expectancy of 50, or earning $33k/year with $70k debt, I think most people prefer the latter.
      I think the point of the article I linked to is to demonstrate that even if you are poor by your neighbour's standard, you are still rich on a global standard. That is not to say you are doing ok, but it shows how bad most others have it.
      I'm relatively well off, yet I also feel poor next to my peers with $2mil houses and $100k cars. The summary is that this feeling seems to stick with you no matter where you are on the wealth ladder. So blaming "the rich" makes no sense since most of us are rich in relative to the global average.

    11. Re:The Ghost of Ned Ludd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that 70K debt likely includes a mortgage, incidentally.
      Probably a student loan as well.

  23. Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking... by LVSlushdat · · Score: 2

    I've been in a few Jackinthebox restaurants that have a touchscreen order taking system, you touch what you want, insert your card, and voila!! food appears by a human in a couple of minutes... I gather with all of the b.s. about a $15 min wage, these will become MUCH more common.....

    --
    THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
  24. Who pays for it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who pays for the UBI? Corporations? Nope, they pay $0 on their taxes. People who actually work? Income tax just means people will just use more schemes to have their income not seen by the IRS. BitCoin or other coins come to mind. Sales tax? People will just buy their shit in Mexico and import it here.

    I'm sorry, but the dole has failed everywhere it has been tried. The fault of this isn't automation, but unwillingness of people working to get used to new concepts and learn new things. If textile making doesn't do it, learn something else. Buggy whip makers turned into veterinarians or mechanics. It is no wonder why businesses have moved to Japan in the 1990s, then China and India in recent years.

    The UBI isn't going to happen. Most likely, here in the US, we will return to a laissez faire form of government, with some new company taking the Pinkertons role in keeping law and order.

  25. No... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the solution will be forced chemical castration of the populace in order to recieve public service benefits. Only the wealthy (and their vassals) will be allowed to procreate, and the general populace will slowly be forced into squalor, selling their souls for not even enough food or healthcare to keep themselves alive. Eventually you will have the elites living in walled gardens with their essentially slave vassals who everyone on the outside will wish they are (and maybe get an opportunity to be employed as when purges/attacks internal to the elite's world happen and render their vassals deceased, resulting in a need to source from the 'rest of the populace', assuming of course they don't have clone vats by that point, in which case be very scared.

    Apt for that rant: delirium

    Also: Continuum. It wasn't the best show ever, but it gives a good gritty, visual, and modern take on the old sci-fi trope of the future world of megacorps ruling us all. And we're almost there as our own technology is sold and used against us, but without the capability to operate without it (or at least knowledge of it if you want even the possibility of staying dark.)

    1. Re:No... by NotAPK · · Score: 1

      Actually we're closer to this reality than you think. Sure, there's no forced castration, but the other comments about social mobility are pretty accurate. The American dream is a myth. Those that have the capital: keep the capital.

  26. Burger King by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

    BK's "flame broiled" tag was a marketing coverup for a major robotic replacement of human labor. Dismiss the burger flippers, and replace them with a conveyor belt. And call it "flame broiled" and claim it as a "taste innovation". There have been thousands of automation tools that have been implemented over the years. It's not a new thing, and it's not a new trend.

  27. the pizza claims are bogus. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    the video claims " we are doing something never done before" and is 100% bullshit.

    Frozen pizza companies have had automated pizza making processes in place for nearly 3 decades now. Your frozen pizza has been "made by robots" since the 1980's.

    The process that place in the video uses is horribly inefficient and is more of a rube goldberg entertainment system than a proven robotic pizza making system.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:the pizza claims are bogus. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Frozen pizza companies have had automated pizza making processes in place for nearly 3 decades now. Your frozen pizza has been "made by robots" since the 1980's.

      Why does all food that is made by robot taste like shit? I'm serious. I'm trying to think of some food product that is assembled by robots that doesn't taste horrible and is not horrible for you.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:the pizza claims are bogus. by hublan · · Score: 2

      Why does all food that is made by robot taste like shit? I'm serious. I'm trying to think of some food product that is assembled by robots that doesn't taste horrible and is not horrible for you.

      Because once you've eliminated all non-essential employment costs, the only savings left is in the ingredients. Everything else is fixed and mostly non-negiotiable (rent, utilities, maintenance, miscellaneous overhead).

      --
      My spoon is too big.
    3. Re:the pizza claims are bogus. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Frozen pizzas, made in a factory, on a huge production line. I'd imagine that they'd taste even better if you grabbed one before it's frozen and finish cooking it up.

      The ability to prepare one using fresh ingredients and pre-cook on site in a space more 'restaurant' sized than 'factory' sized helps for the 'fresh' market. They can be closer to the customers, even if they ultimately produce fewer pizzas per square meter of factory space. You then finish cooking during delivery lets people get a 'superior' pizza, freshness wise. Though I'm disappointed in the level of automation. If they could have a robot making dough, spreading cheese and ingredients, then they'd be there, I think. The last would be switching to a self-driving delivery truck that finishes slicing and boxing the pizza that just came out of the oven moments before delivery.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    4. Re:the pizza claims are bogus. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does all food that is made by robot taste like shit? I'm serious. I'm trying to think of some food product that is assembled by robots that doesn't taste horrible and is not horrible for you.

      1: robots have not been equipped with taste buds or a sense of smell.

      2: robots don't care if your food tastes like ass. it's not like they're gonna get a bonus if it's good.

    5. Re:the pizza claims are bogus. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People should look into how to make their own pizza. I've made myself pizza on a half dozen occasions and it is really not hard at all. It's fun to adjust variables like cook time/temperature, water content, cheese on top/bottom, etc. and adjust each time to get to the "perfect" pizza made just for me.
      Most places skimp on ingredients and it really shows in the final product. Frozen sucks. Do it yourself and you'll know exactly what it's made of.

    6. Re:the pizza claims are bogus. by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      The food ingredients have to be reduced to something that robots can handle, they can't distinguish a bad tomato, etc. With strawberry picking robots and so on it'll probably improve.

    7. Re:the pizza claims are bogus. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      all doesnt taste like shit. it's usually that assembly line food is designed for max profits and therefore low grade ingredients are used.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  28. Are those the same deplorables ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that voted for president pussygrabber?

  29. Permit me to play devil's advocate by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    You're still taking money away from earners (the owners of the robots) to give to non-earners (the people put out of work by the robots). Venezuela just took 4.8 million toys from a company to give away to poor kids. What you're proposing is basically the same thing, at least if you take the end results. What gives you the right? They robot's owners earned it. How is what you're doing anything other than theft? If the robot owners want to give away the proceeds that's their business. But you're suggesting we force them (presumable at the barrel of a gun)?

    If you can't answer these questions I don't think socialism will ever get anywhere. At least, not until things have gone completely to shit for 90% of the population. Maybe 95%...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're still taking money away from earners (the owners of the robots)

      Why are they earners? Doesn't earning imply doing something, rather than having something? I thought the latter was called a "rentier".

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by skam240 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      By your line of reasoning all taxation is just like your Venezuela scenario.

      Meanwhile most normal people think some level of taxation is necessary for a government to run so then the debate from there is what is reasonable.

      Also, UBI isnt really socialism as it has nothing to do with the state controlling the means of production.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    3. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Part of taxes and paying for a social safety net is stability. Paying business taxes is a hell of a lot cheaper than keeping your own police force, military, and making sure routes are cleared so the company can operate without being attacked.

      The company is making money, but Venezuela provides a lot to them:
      1: Security. Nice to not have IEDs on the roads or not worrying about blockades, or warring groups/tribes trying to take your company's HQ for their own. There is a reason why a company doesn't build factories in Mosul, even though workers would be dirt cheap to hire.
      2: Infrastructure. The US Army can air-drop goods and build buildings with zero access via ground. A company needs at least a country with the ability to make roads and highways, perhaps even rail. Hard to get products to market without a port either.
      3: Employment. Yes, you can import people, but without locals cooperating at minimum, fiber optic cables tend to get cut, power cords tend to be run over, water lines magically breaking, and so on.

      It is funny how people think companies shouldn't pay taxes, but they don't operate in a vacuum; they operate and make a profit on the backs on many people. Because of this, taxes are only fair.

    4. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by roman_mir · · Score: 0

      All taxation is theft, why is that not obvious? UBI is the modern communism, it does demand state control of all productive property. As to taxation being necessary for the government to run, why should a government run, why should it exist at all? Government is a system if oppression, nothing else, it steals, destroys private property, rapes and murders, that is its function.

    5. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by skam240 · · Score: 1

      UBI demands state control of all productive property? No it doesn't and your post you link to is rot. You literally just make up numbers with no rational as to why they are what they are. If the total taxable income of the B villagers is maybe $100,000,000,000, $10 of which comes from the daily earnings of the milk farmer then everything works great! Why is the total taxable income of the B villagers only 15? So you can make the point you want to make, otherwise it's just an arbitrary number you made up.

      "Government is a system if oppression, nothing else, it steals, destroys private property, rapes and murders, that is its function."

      Really? Last time I checked my government does a pretty alright job of enforcing my ownership of my private property against those stronger then me, otherwise what I own would just belong to some one with more guns. Likewise, it protects me from theft, rape, and murder. Sure, I have endure a bit of oppression but living with everything I've just listed seems far more oppressive to me.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    6. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so then the debate from there is what is reasonable.

      Please give me a number for what is reasonable. I've yet to hear a socalist/liberal do so. Current taxes on decent earners in CA is over 50%. Any side work I do is taxed at over 50%.

      I've always heard 33% is reasonable, but thats not what I am seeing. I am seeing much higher. So please let us know what is reasonable.

    7. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should government exist at all? Perhaps you should ponder that question before you take your next shit.

    8. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Yes, UBI demands state control of all productivity, it literally cannot exist without the state directing how the productive population sells their products. The numbers I gave are an example, they don't have to be precise at all for the principle to stand: a product sold within the borders of a price controlled and for-UBI income taxed economy (and UBI also requires price control) is a loss to the manufacturer, the manufacturer is put at a gigantic disadvantage in terms of profit margins compared to manufacturers who are not working under the same conditions.

      Of-course the manufacturers will completely abandon ship, the miners will have to run and maybe try and save their equipment from nationalization, the farmers will be the first who to be nationalised.

      As to "your government doing a pretty allright job of enforcing ownership", I guess you are the right person then, the right person, living in the right place, you are of the right colour and of the right status if you have never heard of people's property being violated by the government that you are promoting. Theft, rape and murder is what your government promotes, whether you see it or not, whether you choose to understand it or not is not the question here.

    9. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by skam240 · · Score: 1

      A) You fail to acknowledge that global UBI might be implemented in a world that experiences the same problems together.

      B) You're behaving in the fashion of a classic paranoid. None of what you describe is encouraged in America while all of it is discouraged and my property rights reasonably well protected. What you seem to advocating for is anarchy. Tell me, under a system of anarchy, who will protect your property if your neighbors decide it shouldnt be yours anymore? You against the rest of them? Maybe you'll try calling 911?

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    10. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      A) You fail to acknowledge that global UBI might be implemented in a world that experiences the same problems together.

      - you fail to realize that there is no benefit to the productive part of the population to feed the unproductive, also it is nonsense that the world is going to be doing this at large. I explained it a number of times, here is once again:

      Example: 3 people. Person A produces bread, person B produces meat, person C produces nothing.

      Trade between person A and person B is meaningful. However if it is taxed and the tax is part of what person A makes and part of what person B makes and then this is given to person C then there is no net advantage to person A or person B in this at all.

      So person C can have bread and meat but he didn't make anything to give back to persons A and B. He can still trade with them of-course.

      So person C can trade person B some bread that he got from person A.

      C can trade some meat he got from B with person A.

      But neither A nor B are better off in this exchange, this exchange subtracts from what they do, because person C also consumes some of the bread and meat, he has less that is left over to keep trading with A and B.

      The point is that A and B are actually trading while C is not, he is adding to the amount of work that A and B are doing but he is not adding anything useful or net positive into this equation.

      This is a simplified version but the logic is the same. People on welfare are or no use to the people who are productive and are capable of trading with other productive people.

    11. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      oh, and as to the 'part B' of your comment I will say that paranoia has nothing to do with it, I am simply against all forms of collective oppression of the individual. Your property rights are 'protected' until a pipe line needs to go through it or a cop decides that your property may have been used in some tangential connection to some drug dealing or until IRS comes to tax you and recalibrates your previous years or simply until the government decides that you shouldn't be able to own gold, just as it happened before. As to anarchy, I actually think the state of anarchy is preferable to what is happening at this point, where instead of government anchored in law by the Constitution you have a system that is situational. The difference between anarchy and that is only who you have to pay to be secured. At least with anarchy the money that you will spend on protection will simply be used for your protection and not to wage wars against some Arab nation that is sitting on some oil reserves in a desert, and USA government has done this and will do this again all while pretending to 'liberate' somebody or pretending to know something about some non-existing 'WMDs'.

    12. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Building a business requires work. Business owners put in that work, and often their own capital, with the expectation of making profits. Take away ownership and profit rights, and you're back into communism, a failed experiment that ended in the 20th century.

    13. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consider it a payment to be allowed into society.

      If big business wants to tank the economy, decimate the job market and horde all the wealth they can then that's their choice, but at the end of the day the only reason they're able to do this is because we let them.

      There is absolutely nothing to prevent us, as a society, from collectively saying "we don't want you here". It doesn't have to be a violent coop or some sort of revolution, we can simply just stop interacting with these establishments and leave them to rot as punishment for trying to put their well-being ahead of humanity as a whole.

      At the end of the day, if the executives at McDonalds, Walmart or Amazon want to stay at the top they have to placate the masses, because there's a hell of a lot more of us than there are them, and money can only buy so much loyalty.

    14. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      Why do you assume that someone who owns something built it?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    15. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you could argue that the person who put in the risk owns it. If you own stock in a company, you are a part risk taker and thus a part owner. If the business owner put in the initial capital, they took the risk and thus they are the owner. If that initial capital was unpaid labor, it still has a financial value, thus it is still a risk and results in ownership.

      Employees don't own the company because there is no risk. They show up, they work, they get paid. There is never the risk that they won't get paid (assuming the business doesn't fail spectacularly and shut the doors failing to pay last paychecks).

    16. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by SoftwareArtist · · Score: 1

      They robot's owners earned it.

      How do you define "earned"? If someone inherits $1 million, have they earned it? If they then invest it, and it turns into $2 million with no further effort on their part, did they earn that second million? If two people work the same number of hours each week, but one gets paid 50 times more than the other, did they earn 50 times more?

      That's not what "earn" means to me. I can trace the reasons some people have much more than others, but they're rarely reasons I would describe as "earning" that much more.

      --
      "I'm too busy to research this and form an educated opinion, but I do have time to tell everyone my uninformed opinion."
    17. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by skam240 · · Score: 1

      Your elaborate model is basically just describing government taxation and could be applied to our modern welfare systems. I don't follow how it equals "UBI bad".

      Also, there are plenty of benefits to the productive for UBI. UBI is intended to be implemented when there arent near enough jobs for large portions of the population to provide for themselves. By shifting resources through taxation and UBI these people who would have no money to spend now have money to spend on basics like a refridgerator. All those extra people buying refridgerators (and other basic items) is far more economically productive then having excess capital sitting in an already bloated stock market. Obviously there are ceilings to how much this can be done (making refriderators and conducting commerce in general still needs to be profitable for those still engaging in such) and where those might be is certainly debatable but there's a shit ton of money sitting out there right now even not doing a damn thing.

      After that there's the obviouse issue of social order. People will feal far less compelled to steal and visit violence on others if they have the basics covered. Also, if enough people cant find employment, revolution is a likely result which often does not go well for those in power.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    18. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by skam240 · · Score: 1

      Let's forget all of the basic services government provides without which our lives would be shit.

      With everyone living in a state of anarchy, how long do you think it would take for a few less moral people to collectivise (say by forming a government) and start taking what they want from everyone else. Maybe it's a major corperation that can put tanks on the ground and planes in the air. Whose going to stop them? Anarchy could never last because there's too much of an advantage in forming governments

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    19. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Your elaborate model is basically just describing government taxation and could be applied to our modern welfare systems

      - I think government must not be allowed to initiate violence against an individual, from my perspective welfare state is a violation of inalienable individual right not to be abused by the collective, so I am obviously against all forms of welfare, past, current and future.

      UBI 'is bad' because it requires nationalization, complete abolition of individual rights so that the collective can provide these entitlements.

      By shifting resources through taxation and UBI these people who would have no money to spend now have money to spend on basics like a refridgerator.

      - looks to me you are not fully able to grasp simple things that I explained already. There is no (0) benefit to the productive people in this nonsensical idea that welfare produces demand that wasn't there before.

      Who cares about demand coming from people that have nothing to trade for their demand? There isn't any benefit, there is only a loss to the productive from the unproductive, I explained it, I don't think you are able to fully comprehend that simple equation.

      If you produce nothing and I produce food, taxing me based on my production or based on my property so that you can come back to me with my own products to 'trade' with me is not in any way useful to me, you are adding to the work I have to do and you are giving me *nothing* of any value, because you didn't produce anything.

      I guess I have to reduce it from the 3 people model to 2 people model to maybe, maybe get through to you in there.

      Again:

      Person A makes food.
      Person B makes nothing.

      A person B 'taxing' person A is simply theft and nothing more than that.

      As to 'social order', again, with full automation I think order can be established, at the very least protection of the productive from the unproductive can be fully automated.

    20. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Let's forget all of the basic services government provides without which our lives would be shit.

      - I say that's nonsense, I don't need any form of government to have infrastructure, clean water, anything. Those things have been done privately forever, government is only a form of oppression added to steal from the productive people so that the less than productive and the unproductive can steal, that's all it is.

      As to whether governments would be formed, history shows us that yes, governments always form, however that history was also based around the technologies that are at this point outdated. Today an individual is capable of moving across the boarders in hours, moving money in seconds, working, living, shopping, resting, paying taxes in all different countries (I follow the multi flag approach myself). I think in today's world there are much more chances to keep oppression through collectivization to minimum, especially given the simple reality that the government bubble is already big enough that when it blows it may take down many of the current governments and systems and at least for some time people may not be so keen as to rebuild the oppressive regimes, but we shall see.

    21. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by skam240 · · Score: 1

      If you know your history in regards to sanitation you'd know it wasnt until government spending stepped up that we started enjoying clean water and proper sewage treatment on any large scale. It's a big part of why child mortality rates are so terrible in third world countries where the government doesnt have the money for proper sanitation and why Westerners dont drink the water in these countries.

      As for people mounting a resistance. nowadays there are people who have wealth beyond that of anyone in human history and major multinational corperations whose wealth excedes many existing countries. Couple that with modern military weaponry that the average person cant even approach and so long property rights. If your house is sitting on oil I find it hard to believe you'd be able to hold onto it. If enough people and money dont like your ethnicity, good luck surviving that.

      If the "government bubble goes pop" it will be wealth ruling us and those controling it wont have any checks and balances or tradition of democratic participation to hinder what they want to do.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    22. Re:Permit me to play devil's advocate by dywolf · · Score: 1

      again proving that libertarians are ignorant of history.

      Those things have been done privately forever

      No they weren't.
      Which you'd know if you actually knew history.

      As to whether governments would be formed, history shows us that yes, governments always form, however that history was also based around the technologies that are at this point outdated. Today an individual is capable of moving across the boarders in hours, moving money in seconds, working, living, shopping, resting, paying taxes in all different countries

      All enabled by things brought about by government investment.
      Hell, you don't even seem to understand Civic 101: Government is the People, the People are the government.
      Put 2 people in a room they have to share, they will come up with rules agreeable to both, and thus a rudimentary government.

      Again: not sure of satire or just stupid.
      but leaning towards stupid.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  30. Bar tending machines? by plopez · · Score: 1

    I might as well stay home with a 6 pack in my cooler. I like the interaction between patrons and staff. If it comes to that I probably won't go out for my pints on a regular basis ever again.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  31. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    I gather with all of the b.s. about a $15 min wage, these will become MUCH more common.....

    No, it really doesn't have anything at all to do with a $15/hr min wage.

    The efforts to automate fast food started when the minimum wage was well under half that amount. If you're going to automate a $15/hr job, then why wouldn't you automate a $6/hr job? You don't have to pay the robot, after all, and they never up and quit like Judge Reinhold in Porkys.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  32. Our economy is like any other resource exploitatio by Tyr07 · · Score: 1

    I think automation is the way to go, absolutely, if we can create technology to work for us, then we don't have to work, and more time to play and follow our own interests. This is a good thing for society. Humans shouldn't have to work if they don't need to, as a society on the whole.

    The problem is as they stop paying workers, that areas economy decreases as they are sucking money out of it into share holders / people outside of that local community.

    It's like mining etc. They're going to suck as much money out of an area until it's dead then move to somewhere else, and we need to do something to stop it.
    Local business are good, international ones suck money out of your area and leave it high and dry.

    Yes, they get taxed, but if you have to pay 30,000$ per work which is mostly money in that community, vs the taxes on that worker of a fraction of it, a lot of money is leaving your community that they're taking in the form of sales.

  33. Blahblahblah save our jobs by XSportSeeker · · Score: 2

    Look people, this sort of tech has been around for decades now.

    I don't think most people know, but for some of these automated restaurant ideas and industrial food machines, you read "it has been around for years"... you'll think something like early 2000s, but it's actually more like back in the 60s or 70s. You know that conveyor belt sushi thing? It was invented in 1958. It had a huge boom, then it fell out of fashion, then it started becoming popular once again in early 2000s. But here's the deal: restaurants with regular non automated parts are still the majority and the most popular.

    Wanna see something older? Try restaurants that serves food using vending machines only. One of those existed back in 1902, and it was in the US:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    A prototype restaurant is far from replacing jobs in a large scale, and if this is about robots replacing fast food workers in a smaller scale, this isn't news. China and some countries in Europe already used adapted industrial automation systems, robots and robotic arms. The fact that one restaurant is opening does not mean that it's economically feasible as a regular thing, doesn't mean that all restaurants will copy the concept, and it doesn't mean it'll work at all.
    http://www.theverge.com/2016/4...

    Remember this Nuremberg restaurant from 2007?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    How about this japanese restaurant from 2009?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Eatsa opened last year, but it's basically the same idea as the previously mentioned Automat that had an initial boom only to disappear years later:
    https://techcrunch.com/2015/08...

    Right now, these automated systems are on average extremely expensive, single purpose, hard to maintain, and mostly seen as novelty both by clients and from a marketing perspective. We're still probably over a century away from a multipurpose humanoid robot that can do everything human staff do, in an ideal condition where the price, maintenance costs and usefulness counterbalances paying minimum wage or so. By the time miraculous robots like those appear, we'll be more prepared for the switch, and it'll happen gradually. And even then, it's hard to imagine robots completely replacing fast-food and restaurant staff unless we're talking about a future where robots are replacing humans. Because there will always be people willing to pay for a restaurant that has humans preparing your food and serving it.

    The base logic why things like that don't suddently happen out of nowhere is easy to understand: even if by some miraculous circunstance we managed to produce perfect robots that would work flawlessly and require no maintenance in all restaurants in a city, this would automatically put so many people out of a job that these restaurants would end up having no costumers to serve, closing down before all the investment put into it had any return. But of course, we can't magically create thousands of robots out of thin air overnight, most robots and automation systems nowadays have limited functionality that's not usually adequate for fast food kitchen environments, and culturally people are not used to and will take a long time to get used to automated restaurants.

    Perhaps far into the future we'll pay more to go to restaurants with an all human staff that will only be there simply because they enjoy working with that... but here I'm entering utopia territory. If we ever reach an age where robots can do most things for use at reasonable costs, we'll either have already implemented the universal basic income, or governments will be responsible for most of the upkeep of basic population needs. I mean, you have a damn army of multipurpose robots,

    1. Re:Blahblahblah save our jobs by Gussington · · Score: 1

      Look people, this sort of tech has been around for decades now.

      Exactly. I was too lazy to look up references, but this is nothing new. Anyone who has ridden in an elevator should know that automation didn't end the world.

  34. Re:plan B make jail / prison cost so much that UBI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting that after the election, stock prices of private prison companies spiked by 30%, and have only gone up. CoreCivic (formerly Corrections Corporation of America) was around $15/share, went to $20, and is now at $25/share. I fear that this may be the road taken.

  35. So? by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    We use to have carriage makers...the automobile replaced them. Use to make wax candles, we don't do that either. A lot of automobile manufacturers have replaced somewhat overpaid labor with machines. Low skill jobs being replaced by machines isn't hard to imagine. Considering the ton of youtube videos where kids working these jobs are screwing around, throwing food on the floor, taking a bath in the sinks and what not, I don't blame them. These are the same low skilled people that complain about a "living wage". If they don't want to better themselves in society, then they will be out of a job. They want to party, use/sell drugs, get tattoos, wear their pants low, have 4 or more babies by as many women, and then when they age into their 20-30's...they bitch about not being able to hold a job that might actually pay the bills! Life is hard, but it's a hell of a lot easier when you figure that out!

    1. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Humans need not apply. In short, there have been many revolutionary advances in labor over the past 120 years but this one is different because the jobs that go away will not be replaced with different jobs in great enough numbers to matter. Pre-judging anyone who can't find a job as "well they shoulda thought about that before doing things I don't like" is ignorant at best. You've swept reality under the rug with your broom of disdain for young and poor people. Not everyone today has the luxury of having grown up in a time when entry-level low-paying work in a company didn't require a Bachelor's like your user ID implies you did. Many of those younger people you hold so much contempt for blame your generation for being massively selfish, piling on all sorts of debts and shoving those off onto future generations for your own wealth-building and personal comfort, so the blame game works both ways.

  36. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody argues that automation isn't the predictable and inevitable outcome, but it is naive to say that the minimum wage doesn't have anything to do with the adoption of automation. Sure, automation is going to happen either way, but it should be obvious that the minimum wage effects how much and how quickly companies will invest in automation.

    As a consumer, the experience I've had so far is that automation leads to better service in industries like fast food where the alternative is to have unmotivated people serving you. I for one can't wait until every last one of those jobs is replaced by a robot.

  37. Burger joint by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 3, Interesting

    French fries
    In a factory, shape a potato into a fixed size rectangular prism, save the rest for things like hash browns
    Package the blocks in a multi-level grid
    At the restaurant, feed the grid into a cooling unit
    Have a machine remove a row from the grid and feed it to the cutting machine
    From the cutting machine, feed the row of potatoes through one at a time
    Per serving of french fries, press a matching metal rectangular prism into the top of the container to force the potato block through a cutting grid made up of cutting wires. The wires are found on the base of the potato storage.
    The uncooked fries land in a basket and are dropped into a cooker for a deterministic period of time.
    The basked is lifted and moved over a salting area
    Salt is applied from above
    The basket is moved over a funnel
    The fries are dropped and a container is located beneath to receive them.
    The fries are moved by conveyor belt towards the customer.
    The basket moves to another station to be pressure washed
    The salting area is cleaned by rinsing with water
    Once a day (or more often) the deep fryer is turned off and once cold enough drains the oil from the bottom via a valve. From above a wire brush lowers to clean the bottom and a hose is used to clean the rest draining through a second valve on the bottom. The oil is then refilled.
    The used oil travels through pipes to be picked up by a biodiesel company collecting waste.
    Empty containers for carrying potatoes are placed in a second rack where a new grid is built from empties
    Access to the grids of full and empties are reachable from the building side where they can be loaded and unloaded by a robotic truck.

    Burgers
    Burgers are formed and packed into a tube like structure that can be stored frozen
    Burger is loaded into freezer at restaurant in rows on a rotating base to make each tube accessible as needed
    A mechanism moves up and down the tubes to the next available burger
    The mechanism places pressure along side rails on the tube to stabilize the tube
    The mechanism using pressure from the back pushes (possibly hits) the burger and forces it out of the tube into a catching mechanism
    The burger is moved onto a conveyor belt and carried into a cooking area
    The burger is moved onto a heated and oiled teflon pan, a second heated and oiled teflon pan is placed on top to cook from above.
    Bread is stored in the freezer in a similar tube but as separate top and bottom.
    Bread is moved from cold storage using a nearly identical mechanism to the burgers
    The bread is defrosted by hot air as it travels over the conveyor belt
    The burger once cooked is placed on the bottom piece of bread
    The frying pans are flipped and moved over a pressure washer, washed and then sprayed with oil
    Ketchup, mustard, etc... are placed via tubes from above onto the top bun.
    A cylinder that matches the size of the burger and bun surround the burger and vegetables are slices and/or chopped from above
    The cylinder moves away and is pressure washed
    The top bread is places on the burger
    The burger rolls onto a piece of cardboard which is folded from the sides and then put on the delivery conveyor.

    I can go on for a while... I am 100% confident that it wouldn't take much time, effort, money or intelligence to build a fast food restaurant that cleans itself, cooks all the food, changes oil, etc... In addition, the restaurant can be easily designed to support automatic loading and unloading of all the materials from the delivery truck with no effort from a human. Additionally, the truck itself can be self driving. Additionally, given time, it would be possible to automate substantial parts of preparing the food for the restaurant.

    What I don't understand is... why do we even have employees at fast food restaurants anymore. At $15 an hour, I would rather replace them with robots. Probably could do it within a year.

    1. Re:Burger joint by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      ...and build it all using ARDUINOs!

    2. Re:Burger joint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What could possibly go wrong?

    3. Re:Burger joint by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 1

      Could be. I really don't think machine control would be the issue here. It would be the mechanical parts.

    4. Re:Burger joint by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 1

      I would imagine that compared to employing a revolving door of people willing to take what has to be one of the hardest jobs ever for the minimum amount of money the government will legally allow a company to pay an employee.... probably not that much.

  38. this is why America has to deal with illegals by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Seriously, we are going to see a large number of the low-end jobs disappear. As such, we need the illegals that have not integrated into our society to be sent off.
    Basically, it is long past time that we quit outsourcing and that is what illegals do; they outsource the jobs that can not be.
    So, hopefully, we get a COMPROMISE in which the families that have successfully integrated (kids in our schools for 4 or more years; still in it or have GED/better;etc), while send others home.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:this is why America has to deal with illegals by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      There does not appear to be any laws of physics limit preventing automation of all human labour. Middle management and clerical jobs should be coming up any day now, with senior management going away as soon as the stock holders realize how much money they lose to thieving executives.

    2. Re:this is why America has to deal with illegals by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      yes, we will get rid of the executives.
      However, their is no sense in adding to our problems. As such, it makes sense to send home the illegals that have not integrated, and are simply doing work and sending the bulk of the money earned back home. With that, we can instead pay Americans better wages, and keep re-investing it in our own economy.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  39. Tell that to the... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...massive shit I just dropped.

  40. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    If you're going to automate a $15/hr job, then why wouldn't you automate a $6/hr job?

    Because the return on investment is less than half as much.

    If you ever decide to start a business, you should partner with someone that can do math.

  41. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Because the return on investment is less than half as much.

    But the ROI is more than zero, and increases over time.

    When you figure in all the hassles of having humans working for you, automation that can do the job will be a better investment even if you could get the human to work for nothing.

    And this is really the end-game of late-stage capitalism. It's always about exploitation. You don't have to fuck people over to make a profit, but it helps.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  42. We need sec welfare. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those of us can't score pussy would get a card we could redeem at the hooker of our choice.

  43. I see nothing but wins from automated food systems by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 2

    One of the problems of this world is that half of all produce spoils before it's eaten. So in the cities of the future, why not have centralized, automated mega-kitchens which receive trucks of fresh raw ingredients and transform them into healthy, delicious and customized meals? Sure, they only make fast food now, but there is no reason why robots can't execute the instructions of Michelin-star chefs, and no reason why such excellent meals should cost more than fast food costs now. Together with some sort of automated delivery service, this is simply a much better way of feeding people than what we do now.

    Just think of all the time we waste stocking shelves in stores, driving to them, parking, filling our carts... stocking our fridges, heating up an entire oven for the sake of a single meal, cooking, cleaning up, etc. etc. All that requires a great deal of total cognitive load for many humans, and much wasting of resources. The alternative is that a massive restaurant kitchen cooks up exactly the meal you want, with the freshest ingredients and flavoring details that you would simply not be able to accomplish in a home kitchen. Then the meal arrives through an automated delivery car network, which also picks up the dishes from the previous meal. The city could also have dining rooms with a direct pipeline to each of the city's various mega-kitchens, and these can host social or family groups who want to eat out.

    A world like that is actually quite achievable with tech that's already in the prototype stage, and it's a much better world than the wasteful one we live in now.

  44. Been like this in Japan for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    About 10 years ago I lived in Japan for two years. The first time I encountered automatic ticket ordering technology I was quite perplexed. I went to a window (at an amusement park) to order food the window worker gave me the big X (forearms crossed in the universal Japanese signal for go away, or stop or no). I stood back and watched others go up to a little kiosk and feed Yen in, and get a little slip of paper out, which they then took to the counter and exchanged for food. Once this mystery was solved I found that I really liked it and it sped up service. My families favorite restaurant was "that ticket place".

    Also in Japan, at any decent rest stop on the highway you can order hot or cold food including fresh french fries and of course the ubiquitous noodles of various sorts. Quality was quite acceptable.

  45. Your coffee vending machine means nothing, IMO ... by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Those vending machines that dispense a mildew-laden cup of poor quality coffee have been around for a LONG time. I remember encountering one of those lousy machines when waiting around to be selected for jury duty, back in the late 1980's.

    The fact is, people building and deploying these machines know that the public's expectations from them are minimal. The goal is to offer something you can afford with your left-over pocket change, so they get that impulse buy.

    I think any building calling itself a restaurant is going to be held to a much higher standard. So robotic automation used in one of them really does still have to work with a food product of the same quality the restaurant used with human labor, or people will stop patronizing them.

    If you paid attention to speeches given by Ray Kroc about McDonalds, you'd learn that HIS business model is rather unique anyway. He's really in the real estate business, with McDonalds restaurants as the "excuse" to acquire valuable land in developing areas. They generally make more money reselling McDonalds restaurants that have been open a while than they ever make selling food while they're open.

  46. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    If you're going to automate a $15/hr job, then why wouldn't you automate a $6/hr job?

    Because the return on investment is less than half as much.

    If you ever decide to start a business, you should partner with someone that can do math.

    I was going to comment about this in a separate subthread, but here goes. The concept that we are forcing the poor fast food company to automation by raising the minimum wage, is merely a handy excuse to pass on to the world. This is coming whether the Minimum wage is 7, 15, or 3 dollars an hour.

    Getting rid of employees with their issues is a very important thing for business, especially at the bottom of the ladder. Exhibit one is that we are going forward with the automation even as the minimum wage stays the same.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  47. virtural workers by b783719 · · Score: 1

    hmm robots as virtural workers, maybe they should have Health Care too?

    Maybe we should just mix it with some virtuality and call it Virtual Social Security. We'll also add some robotic rights like buying rights. but what if one robot buys another robot... Should that robot has life contract or sells tax?

  48. Spoken like a true socialist .... by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Free education is never really free, first of all. All you're doing is advocating that the bulk of the costs of teaching students be covered by those who are already gainfully employed. Society has already pretty much agreed to accept that burden for a basic "core" education (grade school and high school). The enrollment fees some of the public high schools are charging are literally peanuts compared to what taxpayers are on the hook for to keep them running. I honestly don't know where those fees came from, except possibly from certain districts deciding it was a way to get around a failed tax increase vote? When I was in high school, there were never any fees like that -- but today, I have friends in the Chicago area having to pay $300 or so per kid, annually, for a public school. If a kid misses out on a high school education over those enrollment fees? I find it hard to believe that's the fault of anyone but the parents for not trying a little harder to get something worked out. I mean, otherwise? Why are we even still messing around with a public school system, if it's not really for those who can't afford the fee to get in?

    The "decreasing number of jobs" should be able to be largely offset by encouraging more small business growth and new business ventures. Every day, people have ideas for things they might be able to do or sell as a business. But government taxes and regulations generally create a steep wall to climb, right from the get-go. (For example, "Obamacare" has caused quite a few businesses to close their doors or stop trying to grow because they can't afford the additional healthcare expenses they're now required to pay if they exceed 50 employees.) And even if we ignore all of that? Try opening your own sole proprietorship and then deciding to hire on your first additional employee! You're suddenly met with payroll challenges, and accounting that just got so much more complicated, you probably need to hire a bookkeeper or CPA as well, to handle all of that while you try to keep your business running. The current system discourages people from employing other people.

  49. Lower quality ahead. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    More directly to the heart of American fast-food cuisine, Momentum Machines, a restaurant concept with a robot that can supposedly flip hundreds of burgers an hour, applied for a building permit in San Francisco and started listing job openings this January, reported Eater. Then there's Eatsa, the automat restaurant where no human interaction is necessary, which has locations popping up across California.

    In other words, a robot that makes lower quality food and some place that hates humans.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  50. The cost of spending money is too high by FeelGood314 · · Score: 1

    My wants are limitless. As automation replaces these workers we should rejoice because they can then do something else that I value. Manufacturing in Canada and the USA has doubled over the last 20 years and the number of people employed has halved. I should therefore have 4 times as much as I had in 1996.
    ,
    I have money but no free time. I would love to have someone clean my house, rake my leaves and give me a massage. The kids in the neighbourhood aren't interested in physical work, a registered massage therapist charges $85/hr but I don't need a registered therapist and a cleaning company is going to charge me $100 to clean my house and require me to tidy the house before they come in. I would be willing to pay $15 - $20/hr for these jobs (minimum wage where I live is $11.25/hr) but I don't know how to find and vet someone to do these jobs.

  51. Re:plan B make jail / prison cost so much that UBI by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    up till the point they become peoples only doctor and the prison will need to pay for that.

  52. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    Say a machine costs $40k and replaces one person.

    In three years, it replaces $36k of wages at $6/hour, it 90k at $15/hour (50*40=2000 hours/year).

    Yeah, may year for both machines are possible, but also, maybe I want the $40k machine that replaces 2 people in half the space, so I can't also have extra throughput.

    If that machine comes out at year three, I've lost money buying the first version.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  53. Fast Food At First by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    Yes the fast food industry will automate rather quickly eliminating millions of jobs. Fancier joints will be slower to automate and have to hide a great deal of their automation from patrons who pay big bucks for food. And please understand that it can not be stopped. Why would we want to pay more for fast food than other nations who automate sooner will charge? This is rather like Trump claiming he would put a 35% tax on American companies that move to Mexico and want to sell their products in the US. The buyers would be the ones paying that extra 35%. And domestic factories would jack up their car prices as the buyers would have less options. The hourly wage for human workers is now not a factor. If American robots can produce better and faster than Chinese robots we will make a lot of money exporting goods. But if their robots are better than ours then we will suffer badly. The real problem is funding for our colleges and school systems. If we do not produce superior students we are lost. And right now we simply do not produce superior students. Budget cutting has likely killed America.

    1. Re: Fast Food At First by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You misunderstand: we do not need many students. What would we do with hundreds of thousands of unemployed engineers? Automation is making most of the populace redundant if not pernicious - an unemployable person is a drain on resources - so more drastic measures will have to be taken.

  54. Re:plan B make jail / prison cost so much that UBI by Rolgar · · Score: 1

    Except for the fact that each person may make several kids, making hundreds of additional mouths to feed within a couple of centuries where the people kept in prisons are only one mouth to feed before they die.

  55. I actually like the idea of a robot mixing drinks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Especially on a cruise or bar, i've been shortchanged tons of times or poured really weak drinks that where maybe 12 bucks. I love good bartenders, but for cheap techno bars and cruiseships this sounds like a good thing. Plus no tipping required.

  56. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Yeah, may year for both machines are possible, but also, maybe I want the $40k machine that replaces 2 people in half the space, so I can't also have extra throughput.

    If that machine comes out at year three, I've lost money buying the first version.

    The mistake you're making is thinking that there is a 1:1 ratio between machines and the workers they replace. No machine only replaces one worker, because we still have those pesky limits on how long we can force people to work. Machines are meant to run 24/7.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  57. Uh, you sure about that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, personally, want human interaction with restaurant staff.

    But then, I do not consider McDonalds (as one example) to be a restaurant. So perhaps we have a categorisation error here.

    If I want cheap crap food then I don't care what dispenses it. If I want to go to a restaurant then I'm after a food experience, and that is enhanced by humans.

  58. More Lasers please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want a pizza made where it's done entirely with lasers. Cut the ingredients, cook it, cut it, push it onto a plate, oh yeah.

    Realistically it's more likely that for a pizza they will just make a wedge shaped dough cutter and save the lasers for final cuts. Pizzas tend to be too sticky unless coated in oil.

  59. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    But the ROI is more than zero, and increases over time.

    That is not necessarily true, unless you assume your cost of capital is zero, your investment will last forever, and require no maintenance. But if you assume that, then there is never a bad investment.

    In the real world, any investment has to have returns sufficient to cover interest, depreciation, and on-going expenses such as maintenance and repairs. And even then, it needs to be better than alternative investments.

  60. Robots are the solution, NOT the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is NOT the Robots. The problem is who owns them.

    Many homes already have a baking robot, mixer-blender robot, juicer robot, baker robot, boiling-beverage robot, cooling robot. And a radiation-emitting-turntable robot (not recommended for nutrition).

    Go back to basics - make a sandwich, boil some veggies, cook at home, carry your lunch. At least you own the means of production.

  61. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by barc0001 · · Score: 1

    > Because the return on investment is less than half as much.

    But it's not really. You're not factoring in training costs, turnover, staff shortages during sickness, etc. Factor all of that in and the robot ROI looks better and better regardless of meatbag wage. The $15/hr minimum wage talk was brought up by the CEOs of fast food places as a red herring to try and shift blame for when the robots and automation changes come. Instead of them just looking like money grubbers, they can now blame the minimum wage workers for daring to want a living wage for the changes. And the public eats it up, figuratively speaking.

  62. Please tell me this unicorn place... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...that bakes you a bun right after your order...

  63. So your solution is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....to make students be in school more hours? Because more science, maths and liberal arts is just more of what exists right now.

  64. Re:Spoken like a true idiot.... by mjwx · · Score: 1

    Of course everyone knows free education isn't free... but it's cheaper than a user pays system as well as being more effective.

    Free refers to up front costs. It refers to the fact that if you dont have $5000 right now you don't get an education. Perhaps if you had taken English in a decent school system you'd understand colloquial usages.

    The thing is, paying for public education is an investment in your future as you're relying on the next generation of workers to support all the infrastructure retired people will no longer be paying for.

    Then again, you never think of those things and expect the world will magically take care of you.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  65. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    That's fine, except you can up the price to $120k and have it replace three people them, and theatch still works out.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  66. Pizza vending machine - old news by abies · · Score: 1

    We had pizza vending machines back in 2009 (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/14/business/worldbusiness/14vend.html?_r=0). It fit in standalone box. I hardly see getting the innards outside of the box into less constrained environment as innovative and distruptive...

  67. That's not a pizza. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's prison food.

  68. Learn by Nastee · · Score: 0

    How to cook. It's cheaper than eating out.

  69. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    That's fine, except you can up the price to $120k and have it replace three people them, and theatch still works out.

    Now you're making a different, but related, mistake. You assume that the price of a robot is based on how many people it replaces.

    It's possible that a $20,000 machine replaces 10 people. The point is that there is no floor for wages above which workers' jobs are safe. Machines get cheaper and easier to maintain. People's lives don't get cheaper and easier to maintain. It's a one-way street and humans can't compete.

    You can either accept a greatly expanded welfare state or fire up the ovens. There really isn't any other choice.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  70. +10 funny by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

    What? You want more?

    1. Re:+10 funny by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      What? You want more-eh?

      FTFY

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  71. Fiction becomes reality by Ragnarok89 · · Score: 1

    There is a great short story I read about 10 years ago: http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm/ that deals with this exact topic. The similarities are scary.

  72. Re:I see nothing but wins from automated food syst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While that makes perfect sense, the problem is, that is a communal kitchen. You communist. ;)

  73. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One way to look it is this: You became their source of labor for that transaction. It's not so much about automation, it's about moving the work away from their process so they don't have to pay for it (i.e. trick people into doing it for you). Same thing with self-checkout at the grocery store, guess what now you're the bag boy and the cashier.

  74. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    I'm not making that point at all, of course a robot can replace more than one person.

    My point is minimum wage will adjust what price is profitable.

    Of course a robot can replace more than one person, and sometimes in less space too, that was my point.

    There are robots that aren't worth it to replace $6/hour, but are for $15.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  75. Where are you getting your numbers from? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  76. Wait... by sacrilicious · · Score: 1

    ... I thought they already were robots.

    --
    - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  77. Re:Spoken like a true idiot.... by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Hardly worth my time replying to you, except it's pretty disturbing how the OP here was modded +5 Interesting for that stereotypical Bernie Sanderesque drivel.

    Paying for your own education is an investment in your future. Paying for other people's educations is an unknown.... How do you know how if those people will make any effort to learn anything useful, vs. just costing you a big chunk of tax money to act as a state-sponsored babysitter? And yes, despite that - our country decided it's willing to fork over the money to at least TRY to get the majority of people up to certain minimum levels of knowledge. But that's not good enough for a bunch of people today. Now, you hear these excuses about jobs being "too difficult to find", so they need a "free" college education as the new minimum.

    News flash... The more people we churn out with 4 year degrees, the less a 4 year degree will be worth to an employer. Giving people taxpayer-funded higher education isn't going to do anything to improve the job situation if the businesses aren't here in the first place to hire all of them! That's where things sit today. Our biggest employers are WalMart and fast food giants.

  78. Prison food by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I spent nine years in federal prison.
    We had pizza kits on the commissary.
    They had regular (microwave) crusts.
    Just sayin'.

  79. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    My point is minimum wage will adjust what price is profitable.

    OK, we can agree on that.

    But can we also agree that automation inevitably leads to a situation where it's more profitable than even a $1/hr wage?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  80. Think God for Brexit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thankfully once we have left Europe here in the UK we will be able to get rid of these foreign robots who work in these places.

  81. Re:Our economy is like any other resource exploita by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That ignores that for a majority "follow our own interests" means sitting in front of the telly watching "reality" television while sucking down high carb food chased with cheap beer. In no way does that contribute to society as a whole.

  82. Business does not care about personality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Business does not care about personality.
    Seriously, capitalism and competition move the focus to results.
    With a selection on results, the winners are those companies that don't care about people's personality.
    Only to how functional a person can produce.
    The free market has no intrinsic value for human labour.

  83. Re:Some JackInTheBoxes have automated ordertaking. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    Absolutely,

    Also, I think Min Wage should be higher. Jobs SHOULD be automated to increase the productivity of the remaining jobs, and their should be more disposable money at the bottom to allow for investment in poorer areas.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  84. minium wage anyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Welcome to the fallout of the minimum wage. When the cost benefit analysis of a machine, with no health insurance premiums is less expensive than the labor, viola.

    Also coming to walmart, and other department stores soon.