I find it completely retarded, and flamebaity, that only Apple is targeted in this shit, when the entire rest of the industry does it too. Is there going to be a boycott over Xboxes? Microsoft makes their shit with Foxconn too.
I'm sorry, but there's absolutely no evidence of anything you've said here actually happening.
No, you don't. I will personally hire everyone currently unemployed for a year, as long as they're collectively willing to work in exchange for a coequal share between all of my new employees of the $20 currently in my wallet. Naturally they'll all decline my offer because I'm not paying enough, but that's the point: It isn't that there are no jobs, it's that there are no jobs that pay as much as these people are demanding for their labor.
This example is pure an utter horse shit. If the jobs don't pay enough, then they aren't taken, thus the idea that you don't have enough jobs is valid.
If there is nothing to be done that can cause their labor to be more valuable, we need to do something to make it so that the amount their labor is actually worth in the marketplace is enough for them to make a living on. That means reducing the cost of consumer goods, which you do by increasing efficiency and automation.
Displacing more jobs in the process. And you're making the HUGE assumption that the company in question isn't just going to pocket the savings.
As part of a team tasked with working toward them, having received relevant training? Almost all of them. Certainly all of them with any worth ethic whatsoever, and the people with no work ethic are supposed to starve.
Not only is that statement absolutely fucking disgusting, it's completely retarded to boot. Not every deplaced worker has access to the training, or is capable of actually making use of it. Sad to say, but there are a number of people who's only real skill is their brawn. They probably have a good enough work ethic, but if there isn't a job needed for them, what do they do?
While yes, it does eventually benefit the nation IF the H1-Bs end up staying here, there's no denying that there is a good amount of growing pain associated with it.
Will most people really care if fast food restraunts are automated? They're already little more than glorified food vending machines. Once robots can handle the harder behind the scenes tasks (cooking, cleaning, etc.) cheaply enough, most fast food chains will probably go to a model where you order via a touch screen (and/or electronically via your own device) and get food served up by robots. There will need to be a human manager on hand to deal with problems, but the rest of the staff can be eliminated. Also, telepresence might make it so that one manager can cover many locations. There are already robotic cooks and such, so this is only a matter of time. The only thing that will slow this down is some peoples' resistance to change, but the way fast food is set up will make this easier. Even in nice restraunts you can expect to see some of the behind-the-scenes jobs quietly vanish.
As a consumer, I probably wouldn't care about this. It would make things more consistent, but it also means that it would be harder for the guy manning the grill to make something not on the menu. Like a 6x6 at In & Out (6 hamburger patties and 6 pieces of cheese. They're not supposed to do this, but occasionally you'll find someone who will). Or the other "hidden" items on menus that are the result of creativity and experimentation. But that's not a huge concern for me regarding this.
The people who really will care are those who's jobs are displaced. You might say, "Well, who wants to do those jobs anyway!" To which I'd respond, "People who want to eat and have shelter, and can't really do knowledge work or white collar work." Currently, we still live in a society where the belief is that you need to work in order to eat. Take away the work, and what do these people have? How do they eat? How do they pay rent? How do they take care of their families?
And don't give me some bullshit about Star Trek level replicators. I'm sure that technology will eventually exist, but not in time to actually solve this problem.
WTF? Worrying about what's actually going to happen to those people makes someone a Luddite?
Eventually, the completely automated future will happen, and it will probably be awesome. But we are extremely far from that today. What happens between now and then? What happens to all the people who get displaced because of the increased automation? Not everyone has the skills or knowledge necessary to transition into white collar or knowledge work.
No. For the most part, people believe that you need to work to survive. There is some assistance available, but there's also a lot of scorn for those who aren't able to find work. There definitely is not enough assistance out there to accommodate the levels of unemployment that some people are pushing.
In any food chain, a species that outstrips it's resources dies off until its numbers once again reach a sustainable level. What makes you think humans are any different?
Except we're actually quite capable of producing enough food to feed everyone. The problem is, most people also believe that others should have to work for food. And when you can't find work, getting food becomes harder.
As to deciding, I'd say that a working, productive member of society has demonstrated their qualifications.
Most of the people who have reproduced were a "working, productive member of society" when they did. Then shit happened, as shit is wont to do. What of them?
As US manufacturing workers become more productive, more are freed up to do things which a less prosperous country could not afford to do, like developing software.
Actually, it seems like those freed up from manufacturing pretty much just get freed up. There isn't much for them to do.
First, are those minimum-wage jobs really the ones you want to be doing?
When the alternative is starving out on the street, then yes. You forget, there are a number of people to whom this is the only thing they're really qualified for.
because every dollar saved by efficiency is a dollar in somebody's pocket that they can spend paying someone to do something new.
But as the current economic status in the US shows, what they can do, and what they will do is completely different. Companies are sitting on huge piles of cash. Very few of them are hiring.
You don't run out of jobs until there is nothing left worth doing.
Of course you do.
Is commercial-scale Fusion working? Have we colonized Mars yet? Anybody prove whether or not P = NP? How 'bout that cure for cancer?
And of the current unemployed, how many of them do you think are actually capable of doing any of these things?
Personally, I'm of the opinion that we're rapidly reaching the point where there won't be enough work. Period. Globalization. Automation. Robotics. Telepresence. Millions of people are going to be displaced and rendered obsolete. If not billions.
Agreed. And so far no one has come up with an actual, Real World solution of what to do with them. Try to bring this problem up, and those pushing the automation progress will label you a Luddite.
Ok, but what about the people who can't do the jobs you listed on the second list? There are still a significant amount of people who's only real marketable skill is "manual labor". What about them? Should they just go fuck off and die?
I'm not against progress in automation at all. However, I think most of the people, like you, who are pushing for it are completely forgetting that these are PEOPLE we're displacing here. People who need to eat, who need a home, and who need to support their families.
Who willingly pays for an operating system, word processor, or spreadsheet nowadays?
People still pay quite a bit for Office and Windows.
Further, while there's a lot of Open Source business software to be had for no cost, there's also a lot of money in customizing that software to meet the business's needs.
No, that's just stupid. That presumes that the effort and time put into providing the service are worthless. Just because there isn't a physical object produced at the end of it doesn't mean that there wasn't work done or value produced.
Unless you feel there's no actual value in the time and effort put forth into providing that service to you. In which case, you're more than welcome to do it your own damn self.
The article assumes more jobs are a good thing. That is a last century concept. How many people actually want to work all day? Most people do it to get the things they really want: food, a decent home, etc. The job itself is a necessary evil, and if they could get the things they wanted without it, they would. We should aim for productivity so insanely high that people don't *have* to work for a living, just like the rich do now. Then the people who actually enjoy doing whatever it takes can take care of the remaining work.
Here's the huge problem with your stance: On the whole, it seems good. Fewer people will have to actually work, and thus giving people more time to pursue things they actually are interested in. The problem is, in the Real World, people have to eat. And currently, in order to get food, shelter, clothing, and other things, you have to work.
Aiming for a society in which you don't have to work is good, but unless you account for the transition time between actually getting there and when the jobs go away, and make some kind of plan to cover the people who have lost these jobs, you're going to be in for a world of hurt. And it's extremely possible that such things would actually put a halt to your transition in the middle of it happening.
Slashdot Mirror
No, that won't work. The regulatory regime in this country is simply too overbearing. Compliance is too expensive./quote.
That is absolutely, positively not fucking true, and you know it.
I find it completely retarded, and flamebaity, that only Apple is targeted in this shit, when the entire rest of the industry does it too. Is there going to be a boycott over Xboxes? Microsoft makes their shit with Foxconn too.
And so that's an excuse to fuck them harder, then?
I'm sorry, but there's absolutely no evidence of anything you've said here actually happening.
No, you don't. I will personally hire everyone currently unemployed for a year, as long as they're collectively willing to work in exchange for a coequal share between all of my new employees of the $20 currently in my wallet. Naturally they'll all decline my offer because I'm not paying enough, but that's the point: It isn't that there are no jobs, it's that there are no jobs that pay as much as these people are demanding for their labor.
This example is pure an utter horse shit. If the jobs don't pay enough, then they aren't taken, thus the idea that you don't have enough jobs is valid.
If there is nothing to be done that can cause their labor to be more valuable, we need to do something to make it so that the amount their labor is actually worth in the marketplace is enough for them to make a living on. That means reducing the cost of consumer goods, which you do by increasing efficiency and automation.
Displacing more jobs in the process. And you're making the HUGE assumption that the company in question isn't just going to pocket the savings.
As part of a team tasked with working toward them, having received relevant training? Almost all of them. Certainly all of them with any worth ethic whatsoever, and the people with no work ethic are supposed to starve.
Not only is that statement absolutely fucking disgusting, it's completely retarded to boot. Not every deplaced worker has access to the training, or is capable of actually making use of it. Sad to say, but there are a number of people who's only real skill is their brawn. They probably have a good enough work ethic, but if there isn't a job needed for them, what do they do?
While yes, it does eventually benefit the nation IF the H1-Bs end up staying here, there's no denying that there is a good amount of growing pain associated with it.
Will most people really care if fast food restraunts are automated? They're already little more than glorified food vending machines. Once robots can handle the harder behind the scenes tasks (cooking, cleaning, etc.) cheaply enough, most fast food chains will probably go to a model where you order via a touch screen (and/or electronically via your own device) and get food served up by robots. There will need to be a human manager on hand to deal with problems, but the rest of the staff can be eliminated. Also, telepresence might make it so that one manager can cover many locations. There are already robotic cooks and such, so this is only a matter of time. The only thing that will slow this down is some peoples' resistance to change, but the way fast food is set up will make this easier. Even in nice restraunts you can expect to see some of the behind-the-scenes jobs quietly vanish.
As a consumer, I probably wouldn't care about this. It would make things more consistent, but it also means that it would be harder for the guy manning the grill to make something not on the menu. Like a 6x6 at In & Out (6 hamburger patties and 6 pieces of cheese. They're not supposed to do this, but occasionally you'll find someone who will). Or the other "hidden" items on menus that are the result of creativity and experimentation. But that's not a huge concern for me regarding this.
The people who really will care are those who's jobs are displaced. You might say, "Well, who wants to do those jobs anyway!" To which I'd respond, "People who want to eat and have shelter, and can't really do knowledge work or white collar work." Currently, we still live in a society where the belief is that you need to work in order to eat. Take away the work, and what do these people have? How do they eat? How do they pay rent? How do they take care of their families?
And don't give me some bullshit about Star Trek level replicators. I'm sure that technology will eventually exist, but not in time to actually solve this problem.
WTF? Worrying about what's actually going to happen to those people makes someone a Luddite?
Eventually, the completely automated future will happen, and it will probably be awesome. But we are extremely far from that today. What happens between now and then? What happens to all the people who get displaced because of the increased automation? Not everyone has the skills or knowledge necessary to transition into white collar or knowledge work.
No. For the most part, people believe that you need to work to survive. There is some assistance available, but there's also a lot of scorn for those who aren't able to find work. There definitely is not enough assistance out there to accommodate the levels of unemployment that some people are pushing.
When robots do all the manual work, we will all have better, more luxurious lives.
Those that have the skills to do so, you mean. People who's main talent is manual labor will be utterly fucked.
In any food chain, a species that outstrips it's resources dies off until its numbers once again reach a sustainable level. What makes you think humans are any different?
Except we're actually quite capable of producing enough food to feed everyone. The problem is, most people also believe that others should have to work for food. And when you can't find work, getting food becomes harder.
As to deciding, I'd say that a working, productive member of society has demonstrated their qualifications.
Most of the people who have reproduced were a "working, productive member of society" when they did. Then shit happened, as shit is wont to do. What of them?
Ahhh yes. The old, "Just go fucking die already" approach.
I hope people view you as being just as useful when your time comes.
No, just no.
That kind of technology is decades off, if not centuries. And there's still the question of where those replicators will get their materials.
In the meantime, people are being laid off from manufacturing jobs NOW. What is going to happen to them NOW.
As US manufacturing workers become more productive, more are freed up to do things which a less prosperous country could not afford to do, like developing software.
Actually, it seems like those freed up from manufacturing pretty much just get freed up. There isn't much for them to do.
As if there isn't a market for janitors to clean up after the engineers?
Who's to say that automation of cleaning wouldn't be next?
First, are those minimum-wage jobs really the ones you want to be doing?
When the alternative is starving out on the street, then yes. You forget, there are a number of people to whom this is the only thing they're really qualified for.
because every dollar saved by efficiency is a dollar in somebody's pocket that they can spend paying someone to do something new.
But as the current economic status in the US shows, what they can do, and what they will do is completely different. Companies are sitting on huge piles of cash. Very few of them are hiring.
You don't run out of jobs until there is nothing left worth doing.
Of course you do.
Is commercial-scale Fusion working? Have we colonized Mars yet? Anybody prove whether or not P = NP? How 'bout that cure for cancer?
And of the current unemployed, how many of them do you think are actually capable of doing any of these things?
Personally, I'm of the opinion that we're rapidly reaching the point where there won't be enough work. Period. Globalization. Automation. Robotics. Telepresence. Millions of people are going to be displaced and rendered obsolete. If not billions.
Agreed. And so far no one has come up with an actual, Real World solution of what to do with them. Try to bring this problem up, and those pushing the automation progress will label you a Luddite.
Unemployment is a much easier problem to solve when the production of food and housing is fully automated.
Not when the unemployed can't afford food and housing.
Ok, but what about the people who can't do the jobs you listed on the second list? There are still a significant amount of people who's only real marketable skill is "manual labor". What about them? Should they just go fuck off and die?
I'm not against progress in automation at all. However, I think most of the people, like you, who are pushing for it are completely forgetting that these are PEOPLE we're displacing here. People who need to eat, who need a home, and who need to support their families.
And where is one going to get the energy to run one of these? And the raw materials to turn into whatever?
Who willingly pays for an operating system, word processor, or spreadsheet nowadays?
People still pay quite a bit for Office and Windows.
Further, while there's a lot of Open Source business software to be had for no cost, there's also a lot of money in customizing that software to meet the business's needs.
No, sorry. Worth is not only measured in physical items.
No, that's just stupid. That presumes that the effort and time put into providing the service are worthless. Just because there isn't a physical object produced at the end of it doesn't mean that there wasn't work done or value produced.
You are just plain wrong. 1000% wrong.
Unless you feel there's no actual value in the time and effort put forth into providing that service to you. In which case, you're more than welcome to do it your own damn self.
The article assumes more jobs are a good thing. That is a last century concept. How many people actually want to work all day? Most people do it to get the things they really want: food, a decent home, etc. The job itself is a necessary evil, and if they could get the things they wanted without it, they would. We should aim for productivity so insanely high that people don't *have* to work for a living, just like the rich do now. Then the people who actually enjoy doing whatever it takes can take care of the remaining work.
Here's the huge problem with your stance: On the whole, it seems good. Fewer people will have to actually work, and thus giving people more time to pursue things they actually are interested in. The problem is, in the Real World, people have to eat. And currently, in order to get food, shelter, clothing, and other things, you have to work.
Aiming for a society in which you don't have to work is good, but unless you account for the transition time between actually getting there and when the jobs go away, and make some kind of plan to cover the people who have lost these jobs, you're going to be in for a world of hurt. And it's extremely possible that such things would actually put a halt to your transition in the middle of it happening.