The *New* Endangered Species... Your Job.

[MJ DeMarco]

Very interesting argument and why entrepreneurship should be given serious thought.

Unemployable humans of tomorrow will be like unemployable horses of yesteryear.

Don't pass it over cuz it's 15 minutes, worth the watch.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[pickeringmt]

That is wild.

It makes total sense, but the idea of there no longer being any need for the human element on the producing side of the economy is mind-bending.

I realize that this is the fantasy of the majority of people out there, but where will the means to consume come from?

Raises a lot of questions....

 

[PopEmersen]

This isn't the terminator, but this is coming and it's coming quickly. There will be a time when there are millions more of people than there are jobs that people can perform.

 

[brandonrush]

People have been saying that humans are going to lose their job to automation for decades and it never happens. Just remember, for every job that is "replaced" by automation, a new job is created to implement that automation by someone needed to service, design, manufacture, and monitor the automation.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[MattCour]

That is wild.
but where will the means to consume come from?

Raises a lot of questions....

This right here is a very scary question... How would total automation affect the economy and consumerism as a whole?!

 

[throttleforward]

I'd expect a lot more corruption. Economic systems don't function at maximum efficiency due in large part to things that are uniquely human - namely greed, a need for power, etc.
The tax code is a good example. What's the most efficient tax code for our economy? Probably a simple one that fits on a sheet or two of paper. That's great right? Companies can direct all that capital tied up in tax compliance/avoidance and payment to more productive activities, government can shrink, etc.
But by doing that, you've done two huge things to those pesky humans that run the system: completely destroyed the infrastructure built on interpreting and complying with the tax code (accountants, lawyers, lobbyists, schools, etc) - you've just fired 10 million people/voters (actually you probably made them nearly unemployable, as they were so specialized to begin with). And, you've removed one of the remaining areas of leverage and favor peddling that power hungry, reelection-seeking politicians have (carving out loopholes in the tax code in exchange for campaign donations).
So what happens - do we get an efficient tax code, or do we grow the tax code every year? No surprise, the humans tend to vote for their continued survival.
Another example that the video touches on is the driverless car. We have it right now, today. So why haven't transport companies started using them? Regulatory and legal impediments. Will we have them? Yes, but it will be unnecessarily delayed, creating market inefficiencies.
It will be a fascinating future - I have no idea what the world my kids will inherit will look like. The only thing I know is that where there are market inefficiencies, there will be entrepreneurship opportunities to exploit.

 

[MJ DeMarco]

People have been saying that humans are going to lose their job to automation for decades and it never happens. Just remember, for every job that is "replaced" by automation, a new job is created to implement that automation by someone needed to service, design, manufacture, and monitor the automation.

did you watch the vid? That was my default idea as well. However the exchange isn't quite so even. For example, you could probably replace all the fast food workers at 10 McDonalds and need only 1 or 2 techs to circulate from location to location to service them all. So for every 50 workers displaced, 2 new workers are created in tech.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[mg1]

I'd expect a lot more corruption. Economic systems don't function at maximum efficiency due in large part to things that are uniquely human - namely greed, a need for power, etc.
The tax code is a good example. What's the most efficient tax code for our economy? Probably a simple one that fits on a sheet or two of paper. That's great right? Companies can direct all that capital tied up in tax compliance/avoidance and payment to more productive activities, government can shrink, etc.
But by doing that, you've done two huge things to those pesky humans that run the system: completely destroyed the infrastructure built on interpreting and complying with the tax code (accountants, lawyers, lobbyists, schools, etc) - you've just fired 10 million people/voters (actually you probably made them nearly unemployable, as they were so specialized to begin with). And, you've removed one of the remaining areas of leverage and favor peddling that power hungry, reelection-seeking politicians have (carving out loopholes in the tax code in exchange for campaign donations).
So what happens - do we get an efficient tax code, or do we grow the tax code every year? No surprise, the humans tend to vote for their continued survival.
Another example that the video touches on is the driverless car. We have it right now, today. So why haven't transport companies started using them? Regulatory and legal impediments. Will we have them? Yes, but it will be unnecessarily delayed, creating market inefficiencies.
It will be a fascinating future - I have no idea what the world my kids will inherit will look like. The only thing I know is that where there are market inefficiencies, there will be entrepreneurship opportunities to exploit.

Every corrupt, fixable market inefficiency is an opportunity in disguise for an entrepreneur.

 

[brandonrush]

did you watch the vid? That was my default idea as well. However the exchange isn't quite so even. For example, you could probably replace all the fast food workers at 10 McDonalds and need only 1 or 2 techs to circulate from location to location to service them all. So for every 50 workers displaced, 2 new workers are created in tech.

Yes, I did watch the vid! I think the video should be watched by everyone. The next 25 years are going to be extremely interesting regarding employment and automation topics. Automation is here to stay and it will only grow at an exponential rate from here on out. What's left to be seen are what jobs will be created by the process, what jobs will be destroyed, and what the net result will be in terms of available jobs. Very interesting time we are living in.

 

[The-J]

People have been saying that humans are going to lose their job to automation for decades and it never happens.

Not all humans are going to lose their jobs. Just a lot of them. Look at stock brokers and travel agents. There are some around, but not as many as there were.

When robots become (1) just as good or better than humans at a job AND (2) become cheaper to use than humans AND (3) not too painful to implement for the company or organization, then they will take over a position.

Like the vid said, when 30 part-time cashiers lose their jobs, they are replaced by 1 to 3 humans who oversee the machines that have replaced them. Those cashiers didn't just disappear.

Farmers in the US tend to their field with GPS-guided tractor units. They don't even have to navigate, they basically just sit and make sure nothing F*cks up.

I personally welcome our robot overlords. The more machines there are, the less machine we realize ourselves to be. Right now, we need human management of the machines. Soon, machines will manage themselves based on algorithms.

Programmers tell machines what to do by writing code. Soon, machines will write the code for other machines (in fact, you can already do this).

Engineers teach machines how to do new things. Soon, machines will be able to teach other machines based on research done jointly by humans and machines.

Many people around the world fight and kill other humans in international disputes. Today, we use drones in addition to fighter pilots. Soon, we will create unmanned robots that are designed to fight. Other nations will follow suit, not wanting to kill their own people. Less humans will kill each other in war. Think Star Wars: The Clone Wars. But that's way in the future.

There's a LOT more examples, but as our current technology gets cheaper and easier to use, more and more people will get replaced by robots.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[RHL]

a new job is created to implement that automation by someone needed to service, design, manufacture, and monitor the automation.

No. As the video perfectly showed, 6 cashiers can be replaced with 6 computers. Multiple chains have one service person on call for all of them. So maybe 12 minimum wage jobs (2 8-hour shifts) are replaced by one $65,000/yr job, but the company still nets six figures on the decline in workforce.

The bottom line is that people should be really terrified of this. Specialized fields like medicine, auto repair, artistry, etc that have billions of variables and require great improvisation and intuition and require incredible versatility (lace a boil, take a temperature, and test reflexes) are going to be the last to fall, but ultimately, barring a cataclysmic war that sets everything back triggered by unemployment or overpopulation, the new economy is probably going to look like a modern house.

In 1800, an estate typically had dozens of members: Mom and Dad, 7 children or so, and maybe 5-15 servants or slaves. Today, the average household in the first world has two parents, or maybe one, 1-3 children, and a host of machine slaves that keep it cool, cook food, preserve food, send and receive mail, wash and dry, etc. etc. etc.

The final form of the robot economy will be like that, if it is to stabilize. A small subset of a few hundred million value creators making value for each-other using technology or, in rare instances, their own un-duplicatable skills, will comprise the totality of the species. The problem is, then, what happens to the 6+ billion or so who the new economy and new way of life will not sustain? China has showed us what happens when you try to get your workforce to compete with machine labor-Working 14 hours for two dollars, with no benefits, in hellish conditions, and living in corporation-owned apartments. Scary stuff.

This video (with slightly better narration, sad to say) should be required viewing for High School freshmen. I will eat my wallet with a knife and fork if McDonald's and Burger King restaurants have more than 1-2 full time employees PER LOCATION by the time I turn 60.

 

[tafy]

This is a good thing lets remember, nobody wants to be the operator on that busy toll booth for 8 hours a day or driving a lorry around for forty years.

What should be happening is limiting the population growth and maybe a gradual reduction of the population via a one child policy like china. getting rid of shit jobs is great!

 

[MikeC]

This is pretty crazy. Just thinking about the implications.

Watching this, I don't even think entrepreneurs are "safe". Entrepreneurs may outlast people working in jobs, but the point is pretty clear. Robots are not only becoming versatile at accomplishing repetitive tasks, they're also becoming creative.

Basically... if a robot can write a melody, why can't a robot solve a need in a market?

Just think of how fast humans saturate a market already. Robots will be able to identify needs and solve them incredibly efficiently. They can then create the product and implement it. They can design the website and write the copy, and split test it to absolute perfection.

This movie doesn't just make it seem like some humans will become "unemployable", but that ALL humans will go the way of the horse. Obsolete models.

As mentioned in the video, the human mind is a computer. Once a computer surpasses the human mind, it makes sense that all tasks currently done by humans can be done better by a computer.

The one thing that robots are missing is consciousness. A robot isn't aware of itself.

Also, robot's never suffer. That's the whole point of being a robot. But suffering is what leads to real art. I just listened to a bunch of music written by robots. It's sublime, beautiful stuff – music that I could drift off to.

But what's missing is the STORY. It's pure, beautiful sound. But there's nothing else to it. Listen to Beethoven's Symphony No. 3, and hear the work of a human who made his entire living off of composing music, who just found out he was GOING DEAF. Before he wrote that symphony, he seriously contemplated suicide. He was afraid to leave his house, because he couldn't hear what people were saying, and he didn't want to reveal the fact that he was a composer going deaf.

Then he overcomes it, dedicates himself to writing better music than ever before, and writes his first truly great symphony (he'd write six more). You can hear EVERYTHING in that symphony. It's not just beautiful music... it's HUMAN music.

Robots will never be able to accomplish something like that. A robot CAN create beauty, but not HUMAN beauty.

The really fascinating thing will be to see if or when a robot achieves conscious awareness. Will there be a point when a robot is so intelligent and so capable of improving, it becomes consciously aware? Or will it simply get more and more "computing" power, but never actually attain consciousness?

Time will tell!

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[The-J]

What should be happening is limiting the population growth and maybe a gradual reduction of the population via a one child policy like china. getting rid of shit jobs is great!

We don't need one of those. The average family sizes are going down. Birth rate goes down as death rate and life expectancy goes down. Every single time.

Population will level itself out as fewer people desire to have kids (which is happening now, look at Japan with its negative population growth! Now if you think about any country in terms of robots, Japan would be it.) However, what will there be to do with the people who are out of work? Make them become programmers and engineers? Will the 'cashier' of today be the 'robot manager' of tomorrow?

 

[GuestUser113]

No. As the video perfectly showed, 6 cashiers can be replaced with 6 computers. Multiple chains have one service person on call for all of them. So maybe 12 minimum wage jobs (2 8-hour shifts) are replaced by one $65,000/yr job, but the company still nets six figures on the decline in workforce.

The bottom line is that people should be really terrified of this. Specialized fields like medicine, auto repair, artistry, etc that have billions of variables and require great improvisation and intuition and require incredible versatility (lace a boil, take a temperature, and test reflexes) are going to be the last to fall, but ultimately, barring a cataclysmic war that sets everything back triggered by unemployment or overpopulation, the new economy is probably going to look like a modern house.

In 1800, an estate typically had dozens of members: Mom and Dad, 7 children or so, and maybe 5-15 servants or slaves. Today, the average household in the first world has two parents, or maybe one, 1-3 children, and a host of machine slaves that keep it cool, cook food, preserve food, send and receive mail, wash and dry, etc. etc. etc.

The final form of the robot economy will be like that, if it is to stabilize. A small subset of a few hundred million value creators making value for each-other using technology or, in rare instances, their own un-duplicatable skills, will comprise the totality of the species. The problem is, then, what happens to the 6+ billion or so who the new economy and new way of life will not sustain? China has showed us what happens when you try to get your workforce to compete with machine labor-Working 14 hours for two dollars, with no benefits, in hellish conditions, and living in corporation-owned apartments. Scary stuff.

This video (with slightly better narration, sad to say) should be required viewing for High School freshmen. I will eat my wallet with a knife and fork if McDonald's and Burger King restaurants have more than 1-2 full time employees PER LOCATION by the time I turn 60.

http://www.businessinsider.com/momentum-machines-burger-robot-2014-8

 

[MJ DeMarco]

Very interesting time we are living in.

If you ask me, I think the producers to consumer ratio is about to get realllllllly bad. It's bad now!

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[GuestUser113]

Meet Baxter guys.
Baxter has a base-price of $22,000, the equivalent of an average US production worker's annual salary. Rethink Robotics also sells additional parts to add to a customer's Baxter as well as extended warranties. Extra parts available include: an electric parallel gripper, a vacuum cup gripper and the mobile pedestal. One of the main reasons Baxter is so affordable is because no programming or software engineer is needed.

There is a lot of controversy about the introduction of Baxter into production lines. Many people are afraid of Baxter taking low-wage workers jobs due to costing about the same as their annual salary, except Baxter doesn't require breaks or holidays, not does it litigate against its employer. Others are not worried about Baxter taking jobs because humans are still needed to teach Baxter to perform their old jobs. Also, Baxter is adaptive, but not too adaptive that it can be completely independent. Baxter needs to be taught and like other robots, taken care of and maintained in order to remain completely operational. According to Rodney Brooks, Baxter is not a threat to human jobs, because there are still tasks that people can do better, such as quality assurance or small assembly where things such as sensing tension are important; the robot is designed to do repetitive tasks, the people do the tasks they are good at, and together, the factory excels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baxter_(robot)

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/innoeco/2013/12/layoffs_at_rethink_boston_make.html

 

[FastlaneTiger]

We will reach a point where everything will be automatized. No love. No feelings.

Did anyone read Brave New World?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World

[HASHTAG]#depressed[/HASHTAG]

 

[Guest3722A]

Hmmm... I don't know guys. the first thing that comes to mind is that sure a tractor trailer can be driven by a bot, but the total job of an operator has too many variables and new events. I can see how using a bot for driving a rig ideally would seem to improve a company's bottom line, but they can't even get gps right yet for truck routes. Old tech needs to work accurately first to communicate effectively with the new. Otherwise, people could get hurt.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Mattie]

just imagine interacting with these! lol

 

[brandonrush]

Hmmm... I don't know guys. the first thing that comes to mind is that sure a tractor trailer can be driven by a bot, but the total job of an operator has too many variables and new events. I can see how using a bot for driving a rig ideally would seem to improve a company's bottom line, but they can't even get gps right yet for truck routes. Old tech needs to work accurately first to communicate effectively with the new. Otherwise, people could get hurt.

The Google driver-less car has already completed 700,000 miles on public roadways. In those 700,000 miles the car has only had TWO accidents. First accident occured when the vehicle was being driven manually, and the second accident was the result of a the driver-less car being rear-ended. I don't think 700k miles on one car is a perfect example, but I think it's a great start!

 

[FastlaneTiger]

The Google driver-less car has already completed 700,000 miles on public roadways. In those 700,000 miles the car has only had TWO accidents. First accident occured when the vehicle was being driven manually, and the second accident was the result of a the driver-less car being rear-ended. I don't think 700k miles on one car is a perfect example, but I think it's a great start!

Driving an automated Ferrari must be awesome.. Don't get me wrong I'm not against technology..

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[RogueInnovation]

Do you even want to spend your life working in a factory? I don't.
Do you believe that giving people menial jobs is a perfect solution to their financial situation? I don't.

Do I believe this can impinge on jobs? Absolutely. In slow to change industries it just equals layoffs. Those layoffs will then be squeezed on as companies get overly comfortable with new tech. They then will not have the same budget for workers as before.
Decreased budgets, mean less pay to the working class.

Bring people into planting trees and stuff, creating better information, creating things for the machine owners and POOF new jobs!
BUT that isn't easy, nor has it really ever been implemented.

So long as there is money you can extract it, THEORETICALLY.

The real thing to fear is in yourself, because if you can't adapt this stuff will hurt you.
And how this will realistically affect markets during transition periods, who knows?
Certainly it will then face regulations.


Computer tech is like agriculture. Agriculture allowed us to build cities. Yes it made hunter gatherers extinct, but now thats recreation.
I think this is good, I just think we should track it and interveine before budgets dry up for workers.

We just need to check that everybody catches up and moves through the transition, then its GOOD for humanity.

 

[nitrousflame]

People have been saying that humans are going to lose their job to automation for decades and it never happens. Just remember, for every job that is "replaced" by automation, a new job is created to implement that automation by someone needed to service, design, manufacture, and monitor the automation.

While this has held true so far, I'm not so sure it will continue forever. As the video suggests, horses had nothing to worry about prior to the early 1900's because in the previous centuries there was only an increase in their utility, but then the auto(mobile)s came about and replaced horses in a matter of years.

In an exponential adoption pattern, the change starts slow, but gains speed rapidly:

"Imagine a magic pipette. It is magic because every drop of water that comes out of it will double in size every minute. So the first minute there is one drop, the second minute there are two drops, the third minute four drops, the fourth minute eight drops and so on… This is an example of exponential growth. Now, imagine a normal sized football stadium. In this stadium you are sitting on the seat at the very top of the stadium, with the best overview of the whole stadium. To make things more interesting, imagine the stadium is completely water-tight and that you cannot move from your seat. The first drop from the magic pipette is dropped right in the middle of the field, at 12pm. Here's the question: Remembering that this drop grows exponentially by doubling in size every minute, how much time do you have to free yourself from the seat and leave the stadium before the water reaches your seat at the very top? Think about it for a moment. Is it hours, days, weeks, months?

The answer: You have exactly until 12:49pm. It takes this tiny magic drop less than 50 minutes to fill a whole football stadium with water. This is impressive! But it gets better: At what time do you think the football stadium is still 93% empty? Take a guess.

The answer: At 12:45pm. So, you sit and watch the drop growing, and after 45 minutes all you see is the playing field covered with water. And then, within four more minutes, the water fills the whole stadium. This means that you think you are safe because it seems that you have plenty of time left, whereas due to the exponential growth you really have to take immediate action if you want to have any chance of getting out of this situation."

So, assuming the automation adoption pattern is exponential, where are we on the timescale today? Interesting to think about.

 

[Iwokeup]

If my software solution takes off, it will save companies at least six figures...and cost a lot of jobs.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[NVaz]

Scary...at least.

What material are robots made of, there'll be a lot of demand

 

[Guest3722A]

The Google driver-less car has already completed 700,000 miles on public roadways. In those 700,000 miles the car has only had TWO accidents. First accident occured when the vehicle was being driven manually, and the second accident was the result of a the driver-less car being rear-ended. I don't think 700k miles on one car is a perfect example, but I think it's a great start!

I do understand this and I definitely believe in the technology. When I referenced a trucker's gps I should've added the main problem that's unique to tractor trailers is that most of them are just under 14 feet tall and there are several routes that have bridges that aren't tall enough. Believe it or not, even the state of the art updated trucker's gps can put a truck on a route with a low bridge. Or another gps issue is that it can put a truck on a road that's out. A four wheel vehicle in this situation can easily turn around. A 70 foot tractor-trailer... not so easy.

There's also a ton of regulations that I haven't mentioned that govern the safe operation of commercial vehicles. One thing that comes to mind are the vehicle inspections that an operator has to do, and journal, minimum 3 times per-trip. This includes everything from engine compartment, undercarriage and interior inspections all the way to inspections as ridiculous as reflector tape. 3 times per trip.

Every trailer is unique. Some trip inspections require the operator to climb up on top of a trailer and walk a frail catwalk to test that all the caps are tight. This generally requires the use of a hammer.

There are so many other things and daily learning experiences with maneuvering and safe operation. I'm just not seeing it at this point.

 

[Mineralogic]

Very interesting argument and why entrepreneurship should be given serious thought.

Unemployable humans of tomorrow will be like unemployable horses of yesteryear.

Don't pass it over cuz it's 15 minutes, worth the watch.

yeah seeing more and more robots are coming news links and videos lately. Fantastic for this recovery if you are in the Fastlane. dam

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[fasteddienc]

I highly encourage anyone interested in this topic to watch this:

 

[Mineralogic]

This is a huge moral dilemma I guess as well. We are choosing to create less jobs so what will we encourage in way of new industries to make up for this? ( GMO/ anti population stuff- doesn't count! )

Is this why they are loosening up more drug related stuff- to temporarily create jobs in industries that have been illegal?

Do you want to live in a world full of robots and everything being automated as to isolate and remove the human equation?

I'm not for it if it involves the same levels of corruption, etc as they are now. Bitcoin is doing this in money but because of audit trail there is the element it could actually be used for as much good as bad - in ways to hold people accountable at least. But whoever controls the systems has the controls and I think that is MJ's point in his book. Are we building systems to create a better life ?

Many people believe implementing more automation/robots/ internet into Government for example could eliminate much political corruption. However -it could also be used the other way. Imagine more drones and robots and Police/Military robots being implemented to do jobs that require no morality. For example pushing the button to launch missiles on civilians or even rounding up civilians. The planet is awakening I have no doubt those at the top are finding human workers tougher and tougher to do their biding. They want order taking consumers.