It is absurd myth that there will be new types of jobs. Just look at laid off coal miners or rust belt manufacturing workers. They are pretty much done for, and for multiple generations. The same will happen to office workers.
The "traditional" theories of capitalism do indeed almost guarantee that automation creates new jobs as it replaces old jobs. As a general statement, I believe new jobs are indeed eventually created.
However, there are two major problems glossed over by the big-picture view of the theories/models. First is the personal disruption in peoples' lives. If you are laid off when 50, your NEW job choices are diminished. Even if you are a great learner, age-related discrimination is real. A company can't realistically test your learning ability, only guess based on your profile, which to them is "old person". The faster tech changes, the bigger the personal disruption. Changing careers usually takes time and money.
Second is the "business cycle": booms and busts. These are time-proven to be almost a certainty even though theory has hard time explaining them. Those caught in the technology change effects are double-whacked during slumps: your prior field is shrinking AND the economy is on life support, drying up alternatives.
By the way, most of the business cycle pain could be averted by following proper Keynesian principles: save up the gov't budget during good times to spend in the bad. But politicians cater to short-term concerns and over-spend, drying up the rainy-day funds. It's the same principle that created gov't pension problems all over: make everyone happy in the short term and dump the side-effects onto the next generation.
I disagree the cloud is inherently less secure than the traditional approach. If one gives their "local" equipment and setups decent tender-loving-care, yes it's more secure than the cloud, but the average user won't bother, including many businesses.
The "problem" with the cloud is similar to nuclear power generation. Technically its record is safer than the alternatives. However, its failures make big news, which skews perceptions and fears. (Gas and coal kill through cancer and other ailments, and over time the total deaths far exceeds deaths related to nuclear power plant accidents.)
Therefore, the cloud has a PR problem, not so much a technical problem when it comes to security. It's not perfect by any stretch, but will probably be statistically better than the alternatives. But being statistically better may not be enough.
Even the poorest of countries will benefit directly from AI. It will mean improved everything - better materials, better components, better electronics made far more cheaply to the point where people in poor countries can afford them better. In even the poorest of countries, most people have cell phones now...
You are missing the big picture. Gizmos and smaller manufactured items may indeed be cheaper for the typical 3rd-world-er.
However, their water, food, housing, medical care, child-care, legal protection, and education may become more expensive to them because jobs may be harder to come by. If you can't get a job because you are replaced by a bot, you can't get the basics of life. Skeletons don't care about cheaper phones.
I'm not saying they are angels, I'm only saying we should bud out of their business and stop harassing them with bans etc. There's dozens if not hundreds of other dictatorship nations that we don't give a hard time to. If they point weapons at us, that's another matter. Maybe they'll start if we agitate them enough.
I don't believe Oracle plans to outright torpedo Google's mobile business, they just want to squeeze some cash out of them, perhaps in a settlement. It's like a mild tape-worm: it won't kill the host, just swipe 15% of their food. If it kills the host, then both sides get nothing. New mobile OS's won't use Java anymore.
What Google should do is invest a notable amount in PostgreSQL, Oracle's main OSS competitor. Then call Larry on his yacht, and say, "We're thinking of dumping say 2 billion into Postgre R&D. Maybe if you drop a lawsuit or two, we might change our mind. Make sense, Larry?"
It's not hype in the sense that our IT stacks have so many layers, parts, and levels that it's nearly impossible to keep them all safe. Plus, co's rush products in order to stay ahead of competition at the expense of security.
Thus, they are indeed a steaming pile of leaks what should worry people. However, I will agree that focusing on specific problems may be a form of hype because for every 1 you hear about, there's probably dozens (already publicized) that you don't.
If people keep finding enough of these vulnerabilities, the patches will make the CPU run as slow as a Commodore 64. Maybe we should go back to '64s, eh? I got used to ASCII pr0n anyhow; I have a thing asterisks.
To be fair, the alternatives to MS are probably just as sucky & leaky, especially if not maintained/monitored properly, which is usually the case in the work world. Dilbert is Truth.
Microsoft's true motto should be: "We standardized suckage".
Making compatible competitor implementations is more difficult if the interface itself cannot be reused. It's my opinion that allowing such reuse fosters more competition. The cheapest systems come about when multiple competitors produce products around central standards. Walled gardens are usually more expensive and less flexible. The loss of some reimbursement for interface design is a worthwhile price to pay for implementation competition.
It's becoming a "winner take all" world. Inequality will skyrocket both at a career level and a global level. The big co's hoard or buy the latest and greatest talent, companies, and patents; and the rest get bowled over, becoming rust belts. AI will probably magnify this as the big players will use their muscle to have the smartest and/or cheapest bots.
Automation/AI can be a great thing if its benefits trickle down, but our current economic and political structures are not geared to do that, and the big players pay a lot of money to convince voters and dictators to keep things as they are.
I know people who are actively *NOT* buying Oracle because of stupid lawsuits.
They certainly are working hard to kill Java. Besides the lawsuits, Oracle also gives Java lousy support and upgrade options. Few companies can make Microsoft seem the less evil alternative (C-sharp/.NET), and Oracle is one of them.
Indeed! I was almost certain he was a flake screwing with the press about the flight. He actually took the flight and proved he is a truly dedicated and faithful nutcase. I'll give him a special gift.
in games of five-in-a-row Tic-Tac-Toe on an infinitely expansive board surfaced the extremely successful method of requesting moves involving extremely long memory addresses which would crash the opponent's computer and award a win by default
Slashdot Mirror
The "traditional" theories of capitalism do indeed almost guarantee that automation creates new jobs as it replaces old jobs. As a general statement, I believe new jobs are indeed eventually created.
However, there are two major problems glossed over by the big-picture view of the theories/models. First is the personal disruption in peoples' lives. If you are laid off when 50, your NEW job choices are diminished. Even if you are a great learner, age-related discrimination is real. A company can't realistically test your learning ability, only guess based on your profile, which to them is "old person". The faster tech changes, the bigger the personal disruption. Changing careers usually takes time and money.
Second is the "business cycle": booms and busts. These are time-proven to be almost a certainty even though theory has hard time explaining them. Those caught in the technology change effects are double-whacked during slumps: your prior field is shrinking AND the economy is on life support, drying up alternatives.
By the way, most of the business cycle pain could be averted by following proper Keynesian principles: save up the gov't budget during good times to spend in the bad. But politicians cater to short-term concerns and over-spend, drying up the rainy-day funds. It's the same principle that created gov't pension problems all over: make everyone happy in the short term and dump the side-effects onto the next generation.
I disagree the cloud is inherently less secure than the traditional approach. If one gives their "local" equipment and setups decent tender-loving-care, yes it's more secure than the cloud, but the average user won't bother, including many businesses.
The "problem" with the cloud is similar to nuclear power generation. Technically its record is safer than the alternatives. However, its failures make big news, which skews perceptions and fears. (Gas and coal kill through cancer and other ailments, and over time the total deaths far exceeds deaths related to nuclear power plant accidents.)
Therefore, the cloud has a PR problem, not so much a technical problem when it comes to security. It's not perfect by any stretch, but will probably be statistically better than the alternatives. But being statistically better may not be enough.
Either when Emacs won Best Editor award, or when Duke Nukem revision finally came out.
I was going to say "hands", you bigly loser! #SoSad
0.5...
Sorry, but your analogy is too much of a stretch for me to apply it.
Also languages have almost always been exempt from patents, and usually from copyrights also. API's are essentially language.
Per "1984" book, their statement is corporate double-speak at its finest.
You are missing the big picture. Gizmos and smaller manufactured items may indeed be cheaper for the typical 3rd-world-er.
However, their water, food, housing, medical care, child-care, legal protection, and education may become more expensive to them because jobs may be harder to come by. If you can't get a job because you are replaced by a bot, you can't get the basics of life. Skeletons don't care about cheaper phones.
= money has privileges in a plutocracy.
I'm not saying they are angels, I'm only saying we should bud out of their business and stop harassing them with bans etc. There's dozens if not hundreds of other dictatorship nations that we don't give a hard time to. If they point weapons at us, that's another matter. Maybe they'll start if we agitate them enough.
I don't believe Oracle plans to outright torpedo Google's mobile business, they just want to squeeze some cash out of them, perhaps in a settlement. It's like a mild tape-worm: it won't kill the host, just swipe 15% of their food. If it kills the host, then both sides get nothing. New mobile OS's won't use Java anymore.
What Google should do is invest a notable amount in PostgreSQL, Oracle's main OSS competitor. Then call Larry on his yacht, and say, "We're thinking of dumping say 2 billion into Postgre R&D. Maybe if you drop a lawsuit or two, we might change our mind. Make sense, Larry?"
I don't know any text in the Constitution that uses phrasing as direct as "clearly retards progress". Care to cite any?
Huh? M$ is still evil and still have the work world by the balls. Wanna list?
Correction #1: "...pile of leaks that should worry people."
#2: "I have a thing for asterisks."
Friggen Mondays. (I was off yesterday, so it's a mental monday.)
It's not hype in the sense that our IT stacks have so many layers, parts, and levels that it's nearly impossible to keep them all safe. Plus, co's rush products in order to stay ahead of competition at the expense of security.
Thus, they are indeed a steaming pile of leaks what should worry people. However, I will agree that focusing on specific problems may be a form of hype because for every 1 you hear about, there's probably dozens (already publicized) that you don't.
If people keep finding enough of these vulnerabilities, the patches will make the CPU run as slow as a Commodore 64. Maybe we should go back to '64s, eh? I got used to ASCII pr0n anyhow; I have a thing asterisks.
To be fair, the alternatives to MS are probably just as sucky & leaky, especially if not maintained/monitored properly, which is usually the case in the work world. Dilbert is Truth.
Microsoft's true motto should be: "We standardized suckage".
Probably those complaining about Skype:
"This f&cking Skype is a b&stardized pile of steaming sh&t!"
Making compatible competitor implementations is more difficult if the interface itself cannot be reused. It's my opinion that allowing such reuse fosters more competition. The cheapest systems come about when multiple competitors produce products around central standards. Walled gardens are usually more expensive and less flexible. The loss of some reimbursement for interface design is a worthwhile price to pay for implementation competition.
It's becoming a "winner take all" world. Inequality will skyrocket both at a career level and a global level. The big co's hoard or buy the latest and greatest talent, companies, and patents; and the rest get bowled over, becoming rust belts. AI will probably magnify this as the big players will use their muscle to have the smartest and/or cheapest bots.
Automation/AI can be a great thing if its benefits trickle down, but our current economic and political structures are not geared to do that, and the big players pay a lot of money to convince voters and dictators to keep things as they are.
They certainly are working hard to kill Java. Besides the lawsuits, Oracle also gives Java lousy support and upgrade options. Few companies can make Microsoft seem the less evil alternative (C-sharp/.NET), and Oracle is one of them.
It's tables all the way down. Turtles just rent them.
Indeed! I was almost certain he was a flake screwing with the press about the flight. He actually took the flight and proved he is a truly dedicated and faithful nutcase. I'll give him a special gift.
Finally, we can automate politicians!
Mark Zuckerberg?
Looks like the slashdot-effect shot it up. Not responding.