10

If robots do most jobs how does man produce value?

Posted by terrycan 6 years, 1 month ago to Technology
118 comments | Share | Flag

I found this video interesting and disturbing. If robots do the majority of jobs. How does man produce value? My biggest fear would be government deciding where the resources were used. Humans may quickly become helpless without robots to do their basic needs. Normally I embrace and become excited about new technology. How do my fellow Gulchers feel about this?
SOURCE URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU&feature=player_detailpage


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 6 years, 1 month ago
    And what is a "robot"? You are thinking of a hard machine. What about nanobots? We have been putting lifeforms to work for us - far beyond the draft animal, though there is that - for thousands of years: bread, beer, wine, sauerkraut... Do you imagine people otherwise employed pumping air into dough unemployed by yeast?

    And what about all of the converses, robot hands, bionic implants, even eye glasses and hearing aids, all "robots" - are they taking away work from human helpers who read or listen for you?

    I would have more to say, but I have to go shopping, and gratefully, I do not need to literally "run to the store" my robotic "horseless carriage" is waiting.

    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 years, 1 month ago
      I am thinking of human form robots. If they are able to learn any job that can be a good thing. All that is needed is one computer that can develop a computer smarter than itself. After that change becomes even more exponential. I do not fear technology or want to be withheld. However if robots advance a quantum leap what do we do to make money?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by tkstone 6 years, 1 month ago
    The one thing not mentioned is the economics required to make this happen and support it. It will take immense amounts of capital to make this happen and when it does the cost of living will plummet and the dynamics of the economy will change and opportunities for future investment are unimaginable today. i disagree with the commentator that this time it is different. There is a whole universe of opportunity out there. We have barely scratched the scratch of the surface.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 6 years, 1 month ago
    Robots are used because the cost of getting the job done is lower with them than their human counterparts. That means the cost of living would drop and people would not have to work as hard to maintain the same lifestyle. Most of what is made in the USA now is made by robots (automation in its various forms). Fast food restaurants are way behind the curve in terms of automation, while the big suppliers of pre-prepared frozen stuff arent.

    When we think of robots, we often think only of machines that walk around. But a robot is just a small subset of automated equipment, which is really nearly everywhere now. Imagine how much things would cost if grocery stores had to abandon bar codes and go back to having to look up the price of each thing at the checkout countr...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 6 years, 1 month ago
      Great point, robotic components are ubiquitous. In a sense they are like the very many fractional horsepower motors that we take for granted. How about that programmable coffee maker?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 6 years, 1 month ago
        Automation has been around for a LONG time and it has been an integral part of making our lives better. I think it will continue to improve things, now that the focus has moved from heavy work to things that require more sensing and thinking. In my job, for example, it would be easier for me if a "robot assistant" would easily and effectively be availaable anywhere to help me with a lot of decisions I have to make- assembling data I needed and analyzing options and suggesting alternatives. All thats needed at this point is more computing power and memory and access to data.

        Imagine how nice it would be for the robot to review available health care plans, look at my medical records, estimate what services I might need in the next year, and figure out which plan would be cheapest and best. It would need to have access to medical records from the past couple of years, figure out what my costs would have been with a new plan for this year, and proposing what the best deal would be.

        The cost of getting humans to do all that would be too high. I lose the National Car Rental ad where they guy talks about all he can do "without having to talk with a human"- I loved that ad until they took it off (political correctness I suppose).
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 6 years, 1 month ago
    Transhumanists would argue this presentation is archaic, in that it represents an "us versus them" view of robots and humans. Humans are increasingly becoming an integral part of an "information society," composed of a network that is rapidly linking and making universally available all information compiled by humanity.

    Rather than machine intelligence being an isolated element of society in opposition to humans, it seems to be headed in the direction of a fused human/machine social structure. The next hundred years will be a kind of revolution, but not a repeat of the industrial revolution this presenter envisions.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ritzenhauf 6 years, 1 month ago
      agree. it's old fashioned to envision a metal team and a meat team. tech will continue its march, but synthesis will be the result.

      interesting question to me is, will there be more or less social and economic stratification after this evolution?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 6 years, 1 month ago
    Who makes the robots?
    who makes the machines that make the parts for the robots?
    who makes the machines that make the machines that make the parts for the robots?
    who gets the materials out of the ground necessary to make the parts for the machines that make the parts for the machines that make the parts for the robots?
    man would be the answer however the way the government is doing things men will not be available to do any work because they will be taken care of by the government or so they think.
    The stark reality is that things are winding down at a slow pace and the government will have accomplished their objective which is to make us all equal.
    Ayn Rand related a comment from an actress who went to russia I believe in the 50's who said everybody was equally shabby. That my fellow Americans is the direction we are heading in.
    So don't fret over a new robot here and there they to will come to a halt when the power is turned off.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ root1657 6 years, 1 month ago
      The answer to most of your questions is not what you may think. With advances in 'simple' technology, it isn't very difficult for a robot to make more robot parts. Take a look at the makerbot replicator. It was designed with one of it's goals being not just that it could make other things you want, but also that it is capable of making most of it's own parts, such that once one is built by hand, you can use it to make more of the same. This isn't sci-fi, it exists, and is not very costly at all.
      So with your first 3 questions within the reach of existing technology, lets continue on... Who gets the material out of the ground? Much of that work is already dont by 'mechanical muscle' as described in the video... and with self driving cars being what they are, how long till a whole mining operation can be run by a couple of mechanics that just keep the machines running, and the machines do all the production?
      And to your last point, when the machines are doing the work, and collecting the raw materials, and processing it, and delivering it, and running the power plant.... who is it that would be able, or even know how to turn off the power?
      Mr Grey, the commenter in the video (his entire video collection is amazing) is not talking about something that is going to happen tomorrow, rather something that will happen, and already is happening one job at a time. I think the only question now is timeline and magnitude of the end point.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by wiggys 6 years, 1 month ago
        If nobody is working how will they get the money to buy what these robots are making? root1657 I am sorry to say that you are deluding yourself thinking that the world would be a better place once machines are the producers. You I am sorry to say have no vision of the future.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by XenokRoy 6 years, 1 month ago
          Look at what automation has done so far.

          People had to work from sun up to sun down, and even beyond with light sources just to eat prior to the industrial revolution.

          Eventually the industrial revolution lead to the 40 hour work week after some testing by Henry Ford who determined it provided better results.

          This in turn resulted in more time for education and leisure. For some people a bit more of the later and not enough spent on the earlier.

          Right now I plan some time for my team to "Sharpen the saw" allowing for 1 in 8 hours of work to be spent on educating one self on a new technology or process and then sharing what you learn with the team. This has effectively shortened the work day to 7 hours, but with a requirement to educate self for 1 hour a day.

          Technology is going to move faster in a robotic world, the result will be more time requirement for learning and less for doing out of the jobs that are still around, and the new ones that come up.

          This trend is 100 years in the making so far, I do not see it changing but rather accelerating. It may evolve to where 2 hours of each day are spent doing the productive work and 8 hours keeping up with the new tech, mathematics, engineering, physics...

          I see the division between those who use there mind and those who will not growing, but otherwise I see plenty of work coming for those who wish to think.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
          Imagine we lived in a Garden of Eden. The climate is always pleasant and we have no need for clothing or shelter. The trees produce fruit year round that meets our nutritional needs. To eat, you reach up, grab an apple and eat. No one plants or maintains the trees, they plant new ones themselves through the fruit we don't eat.

          Without work, how will we get the money to buy the fruit? Obviously we don't need it, we just pick it. We have no one to pay for the fruit.

          Imagine, now, a world where the robots make everything we want, the robots make the robots. Some humans made the robots a long time ago but now no one does anymore. What do we need to pay them for the things they make?

          Some things, like land, the robots can't make there is a limited quantity that has to be shared, but most other things no human has to work to create, so do we still pay for it?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 6 years, 1 month ago
            We live like that now compared to even 150 years ago, certainly to 300 years ago. We spend an ever-smaller fraction of our incomes in basic food, clothing, and shelter. In addition, we have things not dreamed of then.

            We "pay" for them all with cinema, entertainment, and music as well as the electronic media that deliver them. Them, and the roads, the jet aircraft (robotic with two humans for failsafes), and, of course, all of our computers that let us chat like this.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 6 years, 1 month ago
              Dittos MM, Perhaps the answer will be to employ humans to monitor the robots and be prepared to step in if the robot breaks. If we are not able to understand the jobs these robots do society could be in a very dangerous position.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
                None of us could step in and do many of the things our computers do. If they break we fix or replace them we don't start hand building jpgs. There are many things that humans can't step in and do now, parts of the world we rely on are already automatic.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 6 years, 1 month ago
          You get it. If robots do virtually every job that pays. Who will have money to buy anything? It could be a beautiful life where we focus on our body's and mind's. Or a world where government allocates all goods and services.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ root1657 6 years, 1 month ago
          You made a number of logical jumps, and attributed opinions I don't have.
          I'm not saying a future where no one works makes any sense, and like you say, the inability of people to pay for the goods and services is likely to be the limiting factor in how many jobs the machines can ultimately take over. (never minding a possible future where the machines have gotten to the point of not needing or wanting our money, and instead do what they do for their 'own enjoyment')
          On your next point, I never gave opinion on if the world would be better one way or the other. Reread what I wrote, it isn't in there at all. Truth is that I personally feel the opposite of what you stated of me.
          I do agree that you are sorry, but not for the reason you claim. I'll go ahead and use my vision of the future that you fail to recognize to continue to invent said future, as I have been doing for decades.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • -2
            Posted by wiggys 6 years, 1 month ago
            you and others on the forum refuse to acknowledge that the enemy is GOVERNMENT. and as such government thrives on failure or maybe you do not see that. The greatest teacher we have ever had is Ayn Rand. If you read and reread her many observations documented in her essays you will then understand what we are dealing with; a government populated by thieves who want EVERYTHING we have. the flunky producers who cower to the very wish of the politician will eventually see the politician turn on them when they finally give up when the you and I's of the world have Shrugged.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ root1657 6 years, 1 month ago
              I'm beginning to take offense at your repeated attributions of opinions I don't have. Attempting to lump me in with 'others' is to not know me. If you ever happen to become capable of having a conversation where you address thing that I actually have said, I might be interested in participating. As it is now, your ignorance of my positions and insistent on looting my time an energy are not something I will be complicit in any longer. I wish you the best for your personal development.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
    Humans are, for the most part already helpless to meet our basic needs without a complex social structure that produces all the goods we use to live. Left to ourselves most of us would perish, and certainly the environment wouldn't support many as hunter-gatherers. Imagine making a toaster -- starting with ore.

    I frequently think about the coming "age of plenty" where pretty much everything that humans need to live, all food, clothing, shelter and various products are produced without the need for human labor. If human labor is no longer a necessity, is it still a virtue?

    And what does the economic system look like then. Do we embrace a form of universal income where everyone gets a fund that they can use to buy things? If we don't need the labor to have the products there is no need to require it to get them.

    Some will still do creative tasks, but the vast majority of the population works on jobs that are only fulfilling in that they allow one to earn a living. We will not all become painters and musicians. Will a large percentage of the population become video game addicts? In Star Trek, I wondered why anyone would leave the holodeck.

    I don't know what the economics of this looks like. I don't want a centrally controlled economy, even if money is sufficiently common that no one wants for the necessities of life, there will still be the market forces of what people choose to purchase to guide where to develop productivity.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by dbhalling 6 years, 1 month ago
      WS what BS. You are saying jobs were more fulfilling when people lived on a farm or were hunter gathers? When it took a day or more to make a simple arrow or it took hours to start and cook a fire or it took days to create the most rudimentary shelter.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
        No, I meant that you and I did things we find fulfilling -- as do probably most of the people on the Gulch. If I had all my needs provided I might still write software. The vast majority would not. Who would clean hotel rooms, wait at a fast food counter, pick strawberries in the sun -- any of the thousands of jobs that we currently need to keep society from running if it weren't the way they could eat.

        My comments about hunter gatherers was in response to the statement: "Humans may quickly become helpless without robots to do their basic needs." Practically we are relatively helpless without the technical infrastructure we live in. And keep in mind that Jan and I participate in a medieval recreation group and know people who can sheer a sheep and make a shawl from it. Of course they buy the sheers.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by dbhalling 6 years, 1 month ago
          Those are creative projects for someone to automate.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
            But how many people does it take? My company develops and sells laboratory information systems for medical laboratories. We compete internationally -- in Malaysia we are competing with firms from India and Australia. It's a global marketplace. I have wondered how many companies it supports. How many people in the world can be employed writing this specialized software? Quite a few get to install and support it, but how many people get to write an LIS from scratch as I've spent the last 20+ years doing?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by dbhalling 6 years, 1 month ago
              You are spouting Marxist/Keynesian nonsense. There is no limit to the amount of work to be done. It is only limited by people's imagination.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
                Well, certainly inventing a warp drive is still open as well as an amazing array of things. I agree with you as to the importance of invention.

                My point, though, is related to work that people can do, particularly in the software area. One person can create a program that the entire world can use. This is a level of effort leverage that is unprecedented in human history. It does limit the number of people who get to play in a particular sandbox.

                As you say, there's lots of sand.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 years, 1 month ago
      You get it. Some will waste a life with an abundance of time. Others will embrace it and grow. On the bright side there would be time to focus on health and well being.
      A down side would be government rationing of resources.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 6 years, 1 month ago
    We continue to create values in the future by doing things not perceived now, just as we create values by the production of things not perceived 100 years ago, such as iPhones.

    I mean, 100 years ago, we had phones, cameras (and photo albums to share), calendars, notepads, compasses, maps, weather reports, stock market tickers, books, newspapers, and games. ... but they did not all fit in your hand at the same time. Who saw that coming?

    And the Rolling Stones playing in Cuba. 100 years ago, it was common to learn a musical instrument, rich or poor or in the middle, the piano in the parlor was ubiquitous. Other instruments were also encouraged. They have not gone away, but we have "robot musical instruments" now - YouTube and Pandora and MySpace; CD players, tapes, even vinyl for aficiandos - on the shoulders of FM Stereo in portable radios, even in radios in automobiles.

    Television was theoretically possible in the 1890s. No one (few) predicted the current state. Among the "few" was socialist Edward Bellany's Looking Backward. It is a heck of a read...

    Cinema... Indies!

    But look what has not been mechanized. We may never have robot barbers and beauticians. I have all kinds of little tools for my grooming, including a cute electric clipper to keep my "high and tight" within specifications at drill. But I still goto the barber. Social grooming runs pretty deep. Even in Asimov's "Robot" stories, one of the characters on a Spacer world is a "stylist."

    My favorite example: White-Out - invented by a freelance typist.

    You never know what the future will bring.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 years, 1 month ago
      I think we may have robot barbers and beauticians. If a robot can pick strawberries it can do brain surgery. The Japanese have a dislike of foreigners.
      They are driving the demand for elder care robots.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 6 years, 1 month ago
    This is just complete nonsense. The thing that makes humans unique is our ability to reason. If we no longer need to calculate logarithms, we can build concepts on logarithms. This does not mean we have no work, we just higher level work.

    If we no longer need to make drawings on the computer by defining simple lines and circles, we can focus on animation. If we make animation easier then we can focus or realistic movement. If we make that easier we can focus on 3D.

    This video is Ludditism.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
      By "we" do you mean all humans, or a small sample who achieve the peak of creativity? The essence of Atlas Shrugged is that there are a relatively small number of people who actually make things happen. In a robotic society they would still exist but would direct robots and not craftsman. Howard Roark would build amazing buildings that would reflect his vision -- all by himself. None of the draftsmen, craftsmen, would be necessary, their tasks would be automated.

      Can you build a society around each of 9 billion people being like Howard Roark?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by dbhalling 6 years, 1 month ago
        I disagree that is what AS says. I have found that when creativity is protected it is amazing what and who will create things. Obviously the most complex creations will be created by Galts, but almost everyone is capable of amazing creations within their skills. A short study of the history of inventions in the US will show that this is true. What we need is stronger protection for creators, not the nonsense that creation is a group project that happens by itself.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
          Oh, creation is not a group project. A vision is generally unique to an individual, others on their team may augment it with visions of their own before it's a product. I don't think that the vast majority of the people of the planet are likely to make creative leaps, and certainly not on a daily basis. There will, of course, be creativity found in unexpected places.

          If AS doesn't say that a small number of people makes things happen then the idea of them separating themselves from the rest of humanity becomes nonsense. The people who don't go to the Gulch would just keep creating things and not notice them missing.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by dbhalling 6 years, 1 month ago
            The point is that when socialism exists very few people are willing to continue to create. That does not say that they are not able to do so under other circumstances. Of course they do not hone this skills because there is not point in doing so.

            The US was not just populated with people of extraordinary skills, it was that the system allowed these people to benefit from their creativity. As a result the US was the most inventive and therefore the richest country in the history of the world.

            You have confused cause and effect in AS.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DeanStriker 6 years, 1 month ago
    Value comes from design efforts, manufacturing, production, distributing, advertising... all the factors from creation to consumption... and then disposal.

    There is always more work to be done. It doesn't get done with minimum wages, rules and regs, welfare, or any other edict of our Rulers.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 6 years, 1 month ago
      I would love to have a personal assistant that I didnt have to pay, worry about security, etc., and that could really do things for me. Sort of like SIRI on my iphone, but would understand what I needed and do it- like file papers, pay bills, give me reports, etc. Technology isnt really there today, but I relish the time when it is.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by lrshultis 6 years, 1 month ago
    Value is a measurement and not something produced. Perhaps wealth or products and services would be better. Value is an individual's estimate of worth to the individual and not determined by others in a trade or purchase.

    What are 'the majority jobs'?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 years, 1 month ago
      The one you do is likely to be one of them.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by lrshultis 6 years, 1 month ago
        Here is my problem with "the majority jobs". There are such things as prepositions which seem to be getting ignored in today's English. Shouldn't you have "the majority of jobs" which would not require your reader to make up a meaning or go to the Feminist Majority Jobs thing to figure out the meaning.
        The dropping of prepositions along with forms of 'to be' seems to be becoming common in this era of tweeting.
        Sorry for being pedantic about it but I am old and still remember some English lessons from late 1940's.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 6 years, 1 month ago
      Two kinds of prices. The selling price and the buying price....And ever the twain shall meet in the middle - or somewhere else.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by lrshultis 6 years, 1 month ago
        I said nothing about price, just about value to an individual. No transaction was implied.
        The post was about whether man produces value. Values exist only in minds and not in products. Prices will vary depend upon the value judgments of individuals. Of Course Rand defined a noun 'value' as something that one acts to gain and or keep, which is a much wider concept which includes both tangible and intangible aspects of objective reality. But it remains that a value is a measurement in individual minds.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 6 years, 1 month ago
    So...they are talking about the automation computer singularity which is just around the corner. The entire reason to invent is to replace labor. However, I don't think that robots will ever become creative, even cybernetic ones. The next question becomes, "Is artificial Intelligence true consciousness?" I don't think so. That puts creativity strictly in human hands. Still, it doesn't mean that robots can't take over if we endow them with enough power that is no longer controlled by humans. (I might start drinking)
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
      Can robots match human creativity? Underlying this is another question: are our brains mechanistic or is there some non-physical portion of our minds that is an essential part of our mental process? If you accept a completely physical explanation based on the structure and capability of our neural network, it is potentially able to be recreated. And if we can recreate it, it is likely that we can improve upon it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Herb7734 6 years, 1 month ago
        Although I am totally unequipped to do so, I question whether our brains are merely a mechanism. True, they are powered by electricity, but the processing of data as supplied by the senses differs from unit to unit. Differences in size, and other physical descriptions doesn't appear to influence the various and variable abilities of different brains giving some greater capacity for things other than the same capacity in others. The famous example is of Einstein's bad violin playing. Recreating a human neural network seems to be futile. For each inherited ability, the recreation would need to be different from other recreations. Then the ability to improve by striking out in a previously unexplored or for that matter, unimagined areas would need to be included in the programming. I don't think that's possible. It's hard enough to believe in the human brain.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years, 1 month ago
    It does pose a conundrum but no matter how far up-line you might go in the process humans would have to build and create the robots that make the robots...somewhere in this process there must be human intention.
    It would seem that for the rest of us, we might have to redefine what it is to create value most of which might be merely from our minds.
    I don't see, as many propose that there would be a "Complete" take over by robots..."We" in a sense, would still be their "Gods".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 years, 1 month ago
      Hope fully humans would remain in control. However robots will very quickly start making robots. This is the same as machine tools being used to produce more machine tools.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 6 years, 1 month ago
      Again, Carl, see the comments above about all of the cybernetic devices in our world. As I pointed out, they are as common as the fractional-horsepower motors that did not exist 150 years ago. You are telling us that you fear that no one come into your home to work for wages as the timer for your stove.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years, 1 month ago
        I mentioned no fear, I don't think a Complete take over will happen. If one did, there would be no purpose, no reason, no enjoyment in being human, we'd have to back track and take back our rightful place
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
      A human intention. One of my favorite old science fiction stories "Second Ending" by James White. At the beginning the last surviving man who had been in cryonic suspension is awakend by robots and wants to see another person, he gives them an instruction to find another person and that intention gives them a purpose. They put him back to sleep until they can accomplish his request.

      Centuries later, the robots wake him up after having built a galaxy-wide system of machines searching until they found a primitive people and guided them until they were biologically similar and had a compatible society. They then present him with the companion he asked for.

      You can go a long way on a relatively small amount of "human intention" if it's sufficiently broad.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ root1657 6 years, 1 month ago
        Similarly, sci-fi is full of other examples where well-meaning machines take such vague human commands and carry them out 'perfectly' to bad effect. Nearly all of 'I Robot' is like this, showing that even with the 3 laws, people suck at making machines that actually do what we want. Tron Legacy (the newer one) builds it's whole story on a program that is working to carry out what it thinks is the order it was given. Spoiler alert, the movie 'I Robot' is all about how one robot needed to murder it's maker in order to reveal a plot by a mechanical intelligence to use all the robots of the world to imprison people in their homes because it thought that was the best way to keep us all safe, and that if someone were to oppose that plan, then that person is a threat to all people, and so anyone who resists must be killed.... Again, so many stories that illustrate how terrible people are at giving machines instructions.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
          Jack Williamson's "The Humanoids" has haunted me since I read it as a teenager. It documents a growing number of robots who have been built with the command: ''to serve and obey and guard men from harm". They monitor all activity and make sure humans do nothing that could harm themselves. If necessary, a lobotomy is performed.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 6 years, 1 month ago
          ... and yet you communicate via computer ... How is that possible?
          ("Again, so many stories that illustrate how terrible people are at giving machines instructions.")
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ root1657 6 years, 1 month ago
            Via computer, to other people, not 'to' the computer. Even when we talk to people our communication has a lot of assumption and misunderstanding. Something as simple as a figure of speech could be deadly when spoken to a machine that takes it literally. Never minding that, how many times do you see these threads go sideways because even thinking rational people don't always fully understand each other.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 6 years, 1 month ago
              My point is that it is all the result of "communicating to a machine." It all depends on software, on programming, on communicating to a machine. Miscommunication does not invalidate communication.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ root1657 6 years, 1 month ago
                The kind of communication here, where I type in a very limited box, and the machine does not interpret what I put in this box, then I click a carefully crafted button to tell it to put the contents of the box up here for you to read, while incredibly limited compared to the type of thing we are actually discussing here, is still not the simple thing you make it out to be. Even such a carefully crafted thing is super easy to mess up... intentionally or otherwise there is a possibility of an SQL injection. Further, take the example of the address bar at the top, possibly the simplest and most carefully crafted piece of the whole browser, and still prone to situation where if the machine tries to do what you told it (go to certain page) it can cause the browser to do exactly what it 'thinks' you told it, but instead of doing what you wanted, it uses it's limited and error prone rule set, created by people, to interpret your request, and it gets it wrong... I invite you to watch this youtube video where a guy explains just such a possibility:
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fw5C...
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 6 years, 1 month ago
                  Obviously, we are talking past each other. Do you know how to program in any language? See my Fortune Cooke in Hex Code on my blog here:
                  http://necessaryfacts.blogspot.com/20...

                  The guy in the video was wrong about one small fact: ASCII codes do not go back to the 1980s. It goes back to 1963. Over fifty years we have been building on that -- and it was, in fact, built on the 1-inch 5-hole paper tape of teletype machines invented by Emile Baudot in 1870 and patented in 1874. -- and it was based on a cipher from Sir Francis Bacon.

                  ("Tell me," asked the Black Adder, "is the Renaissance just something that happened to other people?")

                  BASIC was invented for schools in 1964, COBOL for business in 1959, FORTRAN for science in 1953. The first Assembler dates to 1949.

                  We have been communicating to machines for over 65 years.

                  Your coffee maker, your stove... it is not the buttons you push, but the programming within that allow that to happen.

                  I must ask again: Do you not know how to program a computer?
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
                    While the development of Ascii goes back to 1963, Teletypes used other codes. In the 1960's many computer manufacturers used different character sets. IBM used 8 bit EBCDIC, Univac used 6 bit Fielddata to name a couple. In 1968, Johnson signed a bill requiring companies supplying computers to the government to support ASCII and it became a universal standard over the next few years.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 6 years, 1 month ago
                      The point is that we have been programming machines for 150 years. ASCII and Baudot are just examples of how we did (and do) that. But thanks for the details to the narrative. root1657 maintained that if robots become more common, we will face disaster and possible extinction because we cannot communicate with them unambiguously.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 6 years, 1 month ago
    food, shelter, clothing -- all may be aided by robots,
    but not completely provided. . robots will always, I do
    hope, require masters who prescribe their actions.
    it will be a week or two before they "evolve" into value-
    defining beings competing with us as "owners" of real
    estate and voters in the future of the world(s). . and
    for those who don't manage robots, there are zillions
    of creative value-producing endeavors::: culinary art,
    music, architecture and engineering, research, fashion,
    sports, and above them all, philosophy. . what, me worry? -- j

    p.s. enjoy! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-diB...
    .
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mspalding 6 years, 1 month ago
    What happened to all the folks involved in using horses for transportation. Think of all the unemployed carriage drivers, stable operators, horse care people, farriers, etc. How did our society survive?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • -1
    Posted by $ Thoritsu 6 years, 1 month ago
    Significant real value does not come from hand labor. Not to imply hard work does not have merit, but no one retired early based on their own hand labor except athletes.

    My problem with this concept is the ability of the average person to create value in this scenario. I can see this taking us further into socialism and unsustainable welfare if we don't take steps to limit population in some manner.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years, 1 month ago
      Or empower the population to branch out and integrate things that have yet to be melded together, creating values where none existed before. The robots just carry out the mundane, repetitive work...that's something that harms creative human beings.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by dekayz 6 years, 1 month ago
        There will always be new ideas to explore and invent. The problem is that there is a (growing?) percentage of the people on this planet who are not capable of doing anything more challenging than flipping burgers, packing boxes, cleaning bathrooms, etc. It doesn't matter how much education they get, they just lack the intellectual capacity to accomplish anything other than honest, mundane, manual labor. We've already covered the fully automated McDonalds in this forum. Hoax or not, the technology does exist to do that today. A self-cleaning bathroom is not out of our reach, it's just cost prohibitive for the moment. It will not take long for us to make the robots fit for everyday use. The complexity in the computer programs that we are using all of the time today are far beyond what a programmer from 20 years ago would have thought possible. It's just a matter of continuing to build on what we did yesterday.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years, 1 month ago
          Interesting to note: that growing percentage you have observed are the creatures destine for government...think about that...I say we need to intervene quickly...hahahahaha
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Thoritsu 6 years, 1 month ago
        Robots are mundane, but not as mundane as you think. Have a conversation with Watson sometime, or compare Google Cars to humans. The Turing Test does work.

        This would go like Japan and Taiwan wiping out fat, lazy, unions with narcoleptic management in the US. If we'd listened to Deming, we'd have washed the floor with Japan; however...

        A majority of people I've met are not going to "branch out and integrate" anything useful. Darwin may step in and we'll find those that do, but none...none...without grave incentives.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years, 1 month ago
          Not a fan of google cars...whatchya gona do when the lights go out...unless there is a level of protection from electromagnetic events, natural or man made...everyone on the road will be toast. I am surprised few have even thought about it. Even in a perfect world there should always be a physical back up system...wires don't cut it and digital ain't forever. Protection should of been no 1 on their list.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ Thoritsu 6 years, 1 month ago
            What do you do with a stroke, heart attack, spilled coffee, cell call, text.

            Google cars beat humans all day long, and they have only been driving 3 years, with one accident to their fault (I think). I get the Star Trek arguments and Asimov Laws, but Azimov's Laws work, and computers are not infinitely simpler than Vulcans, and people are not as cool as we'd like to think. Half of them would be 400 lbs and completely ignorant if fed well and taken care of.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years, 1 month ago
              Computers can have strokes as well...especially in an electromagnetic event...just like humans.
              Look the tech which is not perfect and has still had more accidents that the average person, (I.m sure they'll get better) will be good for some folk. I on the other hand and hopefully others in the future as well, prefer to do it ourselves. That skill is an important human exercise for one well rounded. I personally do not want some machine making choices for me, I am in charge of my own life and my own actions, otherwise there is no point in being alive or being human.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ Thoritsu 6 years, 1 month ago
                You need to show me, in miles/person that Google cars are less accident resistant than people. I throw the gauntlet on that. My understanding is that a Google car has had one, 1, accident for which it was responsible, recently with an articulated bus it did not recognize. Up until then ALL Google car accidents were someone running into the Google car, irrelevant.

                No one is suggesting robots make your decisions, but they have and will continue to erode menial labor, because like all machines over the last 200 years, they have proven to increase production, efficiency, quality and reliability against hand labor. Printing press (Luddite), steam engine, gas engine, diesel engine, electric motor/generator, turbine, telephone, computer...robot. The problem now is that technology has gotten to the point that some people can not meaningfully contribute. Now, not the future. None of this is thinking...yet.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years, 1 month ago
                  The last accident was on a double lane split highway, so now they have to go back to the programing and figure that one out. Wish I still had the article, had no reason to save it but it did say there had been numerous fender benders for various reasons. As I said, I am sure they'll get better but from a defensive view, I not sure I could predict a computers moves like I can "Most" human drivers.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 6 years, 1 month ago
                    Numerous fender benders, all but on caused by human error.

                    Here is the only Google car accident attributed to the Google car:
                    http://www.wired.com/2016/02/googles-...
                    Eight of 12 total accidents have been someone simply driving into the back of the Google car.
                    The Google 2016 metric is one accident at fault in 1.4M miles of driving, with no injury. The 1990 human average is 10/million miles, with 2/10 involving fatalities. Robot are presently beating a 25 year old human statistic by 10:1 or 2:0 depending on one's interest in property damage or injury. (I can't find current statistics, and wonder if someone has obfuscated them).

                    If they drive like Asimov's robots are to behave, you won't have to predict them. You can just drive around them.

                    I'm sure they'll get better too. Uber, Google and others are investing heavily in it, and the complainers will be the unions. Just like the overpriced cab drivers and ridiculous medallion holders do with Uber now.

                    James Taggert would probably defend the needs of the cab drivers against driverless cars over the safety and costs to riders. I for one support Dagney and Hank in leading Uber and Google to release the rest of us from this needless burden.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years, 1 month ago
                      I'm sure some people think of it as a burden...I do not, it's freedom and I prefer to do things myself; it's just the way I am made.
                      I've been around a lot of electronics and there are times that they do the strangest things for no apparent reason...No thanks.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by $ Thoritsu 6 years, 1 month ago
                        I love to drive too, but the choice is great, and it will allow me to drink a lot more at all the cool bars, with great beers popping up.

                        I only have manual transmission cars that turn and go like hell. Two six speeds and one five speed. Can't wait to drive the new Focus RS on April 18th.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 6 years, 1 month ago
                        If you become old enough, the time will come when you can no longer have a license to drive. At that point you either rely on others or get in your self driving car and maintain your freedom.

                        In the meantime they are already safer than humans and will become much better in the next few years, the advance is amazing. You will be safer driving your own car with them out there -- as long as you remember that the car in front of you may stop when the light turns yellow.

                        And, I really like the idea of being able to read, watch TV or even sleep while my car gets me where I want to be.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years, 1 month ago
              Post script...why don't we empower people to be the best they can be...that's something progressiveism has taken from us.
              Not everyone will realize that there is stuff they don't know...everyone by nature has a different catalyst that produces that "Ah Ha moment.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 6 years, 1 month ago
                Because Progressivism isn't and has no positive value. It's a Zero Sum Lost formula
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 6 years, 1 month ago
                  By george I think you've got it...laughing. Progressivism come from dysfunctions of the brain and not from the mind. It is observable that progressives are brain only creatures, only 2 parts of a 3 part equation which defines what it is to be a conscious human being.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ Thoritsu 6 years, 1 month ago
                Do you really think all the people you see at Walmart are capable of adding value exceeding that of a $200K robot (amortized over a 15 yr window)? I see many people that couldn't even be relied on to push the button that the robots had an error, calling in the people skilled enough to fix them.

                The problem with robots is we have to deal with the people who can not contribute as (not when) continue to take menial jobs away. Progressives would have us pay for these people to exist, with respect, and propagate many more in their spare time. The other end of the spectrum would have them starve.

                The US is already here. Here now. We have an unsustainable service economy because the producers can only make what they design elsewhere, and the menial laborers are encouraged to compare their salaries and standard of living against the producers, not the foreign laborers. This is simple, and already failed. Stratification of lazy egos can not be reflected in their standard of living.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 6 years, 1 month ago
                  Be damn glad that one major corporation provides those people you sneer at with a way of replacing what was stolen from them in their retirement years. And yes it's a shame they have to stoop to menial labor to make end meet but they could be on one form of welfare mooching or another instead of working. I only hope they recognize the moochers and looters of the left are recognized as such by those worthy citizens and slits their damn throats at the polls.

                  You see menial trash I see those who don't quit in the face of overwhelming adversity they are worth a hundred of the trash of the left.

                  They should be honored. And so should Walmart for ensuring they can recover part of what was stolen from them with dignity by the Clintons, the Sanders and the Trumps of the world.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 6 years, 1 month ago
                    First, don't understand what you are talking about WRT the "one corporation" and stolen retirements.

                    Second, I do not see hard working menial laborers as trash! Absolutely not! I value hard work and craftsmanship. My earlier comments are not about those people, and "Walmart people" refers to people shopping there, not working there.

                    These comments are about those not working, those that are not hard workers, those that lack the skills and initiative for even basic value creation. They are everywhere. Maybe they can be taught/trained, which is better than welfare, but a cost no less. However, as machines (including robots) take become more capable (a 200 year trend well in its maturity), these people will have less to do. Anything else is economically unsustainable, and to become angry at this or resist it is the absolute definition of a Luddite (a matter of fact, not a jab).

                    These people either need to raise their game or be supported by society or a combination. Nature's version is this is obvious and more harsh. There is no alternative.

                    This is not a future trend. It has already happened. Why is there practically no manufacturing in the US? Where there is, what is the ratio of machine labor to hand labor - very high!. Where is the hand labor prevalent? China, Vietnam, , Mexico, Malaysia, etc. Why, because the standard of living there keeps wages low enough that investing in robotics is a net loss. What I find so ridiculous about this is that the people and unions whose jobs have been outsourced rail at the system, while shopping at Walmart, specifically supporting the foreign supply of cheap labor. The irony is astonishing! These people are NOT the ones "wallet voting" to keep jobs in the USA. They are the first ones shopping at Harbor Freight for tools.

                    Robots are not a new concept. They are a now practical, obvious next step in a hundreds year old trend beginning at the latest with the industrial revolution.
                    There are people who can not readily produce value in such a system, by a combination of skills, talent, intelligence and initiative.
                    These people can either be supported by welfare or retrained/raise their game.
                    This is the first order part where politics (Clintons, Saunders, etc) play in. Even our ridiculous corporate tax is not responsible for the manufacturing transition. The labor cost ratio is ten times the tax rate. Taxes, tariffs, and trade agreements are second order at best.
                    Fundamentally we need more quality people, and less overall people, and there is no feedback system to control this in the US. There is a strong one in Africa.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 6 years, 1 month ago
                      What's the point in raising your gain when along comes the destroyers and makes all your efforts worth 1/3rd less almost overnight? And that is not the end of it. They still have to pay for the current go round of economic destruction. Same system inflation breeds devaluation of worth and debt repudiation on the backs of the retirees and old people pay for it. No COLA adjustment just a lifetime effort that is worth a lot less and no way left to make up for the destruction. When a lifetime of savings and preparation can be wiped out and laughingly called a recession the rest of the double talk is bull shit. Doesn't help Grandpa and Grandma right now doesn't replace what was stolen from them by crooked politician with their fancy double talk and guess what next go round it's your turn. Unless you are one of the very few wealthy enough to stand the repeated attacks. all the ratios and percent of GDPs mean nothing when your money loses 1/3rd value with the same or more projected as the candidates all talk spending more, inflating more and devaluing more. The rest is meaningless and $15 an hour minimum will only make it worse on the current target and do nothing to save the future for the rest of you ....

                      Obama wants a pay raise for his retirement check? Let the son of bitch take the same hit as the rest of us.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo