|
staples... read my post. 
Charlie Gilley
“Microsoft is the virus..."
"the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money"
|
|
|
|
|
Used to be a very important and popular job. They required a degree of trust and must be pretty skilled to connect so many calls. Yet direct dial made their job obsolete and historic. I bet if we went back in time, they were worried about what job they'll do next. Does that mean we shouldn't be able to just make a call on our own?
I wonder if we can draw any parallels between that and AI today. Hmmmmm. Just food for thought.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Technological advances always displace people's jobs and in theory creates new jobs, though not as many and often requiring significant retraining / new skills.
I tend to be less concerned with AI per se and more concerned with the robotization of lots of things (which, yes, AI plays a part in of course) and the droves of people that will be replaced, a significant number being in service industries.
We're not looking at / planning for the social shifts that will result.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: We're not looking at / planning for the social shifts that will result.
Tru dat buddy. And unfortunately, the masses will have to learn the hard way over and over again that change is coming.
People have always attempted to pass off "menial"* work onto others since like forever. Doubt human nature will change in our lifetime.
Say for instance, you know once robotics are cheap and advanced enough, everybody will want a robot maid like the Jetsons. Being a maid is a service but that will die out eventually too.
* I say menial in quotes because jobs like farming is one of the most honorable jobs out there. But even robots will replace some of that grunt work too.
Jeremy Falcon
modified yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
What I see happening in my fuzzy crystal ball is that we're heading towards Basic Income or something similar. Depending on how that works out, we'll either see masses of people becoming addicted to both legal and illegal drugs, or a bizarre cultural revolution where people simply start doing what they really want (or can, with limited resources) do because at least they have a small room, food, and basic medical care. Or something in-between both of those extremes.
Somewhere though, education, particularly higher education, also needs to become "free" because people in these service industries can't afford education. Heck, even middle-class people can't afford education.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: What I see happening in my fuzzy crystal ball is that we're heading towards Basic Income or something similar.
I don't know what the future holds, but basic income is one of those things that sound nice but it's not realistic. It's like a band-aid without curing the wound. For instance, if everyone had free money in the current typical way of human thinking then money would have less value and prices would just go up and we'd be back in the same place. If we got rid of money altogether that's actually going backwards. There was a point in time we didn't use money and people just bartered. It was a lot harder and a lot worse than money.
Marc Clifton wrote: Depending on how that works out, we'll either see masses of people becoming addicted to both legal and illegal drugs.
Yeah man, totally agree. I think it'll get worse before it gets better if so. People gotta do the new, cool thing regardless of the consequences.
Marc Clifton wrote: or a bizarre cultural revolution where people simply start doing what they really want (or can, with limited resources) do because at least they have a small room, food, and basic medical care. Or something in-between both of those extremes.
1,000% agree the medical industry is out of hand and we've lost sight of what humanity should be. I'd add to that the food industry (in the US at least) being out of hand. The way I see it though, it's always corruption and/or ignorance that makes it worse. And we have a ton of that going on right now. And that's a human nature thing that no free government house can prevent. The good suffer with the bad. Which means, even if had that, someone will find a way to screw it up. It's just what we do. 
Marc Clifton wrote: Somewhere though, education, particularly higher education, also needs to become "free" because people in these service industries can't afford education. Heck, even middle-class people can't afford education.
100% man. It's crazy. Now, I do believe most people don't use public libraries when they should. There's no excuse to not educate yourself unless you don't have a library close by. But, this whole college thing is insane. The government should've stayed out of it. The college execs got greedy over guaranteed loans. All comes back to corruption and the good suffering with the bad.
Being an economics nerd these days, unfortunately there's only one way to naturally fix that. College as it is known it needs to die off and that's already started. It won't make life easier for those currently screwed, but it's like losing money in crypto. And unfortunately, while we're all in dire straits, we can't afford to go bailing everyone out... including other countries and our own. This country is broke and in debt and we're just pretending its not by kicking the bucket down the road.
The only way out of this college mess (without turning into another overly big government country that is) is to make the dollar stronger again with a thriving economy full of hopes and dreams. I mean, the dollar will never go back to what it was in the 70s, but if we can at least stop it from getting worse. Then, let the idea of college fall off until new people come in and build it up again. Not so easy to do though, when everyone's pointing fingers. Like the older generation saying just go buy a house that cost them 80k but now a dump is 15 million.  But, if the government never meddled with it in the first place, college would still be reasonably priced.
All this is to say, I think we both agree that mmmmmmaaaaayyyyyybbbbbeeeee humans can do a bit better. 
Side note, we don't need an inflationary system for money. It was by design to force people into spending to falsely drive the economy. All this stuff people talk about like it's a surprise isn't. It's on purpose. Stuff like that I believe is fowl, and a perversion of what money should be. Stuff like this I don't agree with at all, despite the fact I think the idea of money is good.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: We're not looking at / planning for the social shifts that will result.
I am trying, but people is really change resistant and ignore every prove or initiative that comes in other direction than expected.
I know because that's my current biggest frustration at work. I try to open new doors, but most of the people that should get through them, they just close it again and reforce it as it came a twister  
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, people are often change resistant until it becomes a matter of life or death for them or their children. And even then... 
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: And even then...
exactly...
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I think the parallel lies in the fact that switchboard operators were only employed until their jobs could be automated. That was just a matter of time and, I think, inevitable.
Some people are definitely in positions where their day-to-day tasks can be automated. It won't be pleasant for them, and probably not pleasant either for the people who would've used their services. Maybe that's the real impediment preventing it from having taken place already on a large scale.
But then there's also a whole category of people who could be replaced by machinery, where cost is the only thing getting in the way. I remember reading an article some years ago, I think involving McDonald's CEO, saying if he could replace people in their kitchens with a $30,000 machine, he'd do it in an instant. The fact that he came to an exact figure means he's already done the calculation and he's just waiting for it to become cheap enough.
Some people's days are numbered for sure.
I wouldn't want to be an unskilled kid quitting school today at the age of 18.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: I think the parallel lies in the fact that switchboard operators were only employed until their jobs could be automated. That was just a matter of time and, I think, inevitable.
Yuppers. Exactly.
dandy72 wrote: Some people are definitely in positions where their day-to-day tasks can be automated. It won't be pleasant for them, and probably not pleasant either for the people who would've used their services. Maybe that's the real impediment preventing it from having taken place already on a large scale.
Yup. I'd give industry examples of this, but everything is politicized these days. You're smart enough to some industries like this though.
dandy72 wrote: ut then there's also a whole category of people who could be replaced by machinery, where cost is the only thing getting in the way. I remember reading an article some years ago, I think involving McDonald's CEO, saying if he could replace people in their kitchens with a $30,000 machine, he'd do it in an instant. The fact that he came to an exact figure means he's already done the calculation and he's just waiting for it to become cheap enough.
Dude, that's already started. Dunno about the rest of the world, but there's already a fully automated McDonald's in Texas. They're already testing that out to see how it goes. Robotics definitely gonna be a thriving industry at least. 
dandy72 wrote: Some people's days are numbered for sure.
Yeah, that's just it though, it's not always bad even if it's scary. I'm sure there were skilled cave painters at one point, but I for one am glad we have houses and easels now. Just some people only learn just enough in the youth and then stop learning once they age, health declines, etc. Those who understand times change are the ones that survive.
dandy72 wrote: I wouldn't want to be an unskilled kid quitting school today at the age of 18.
Tru dat. For the short term at least, blue collar skills are making a resurgence since for the past couple decades nobody taught their kids how to fix a tire while watching cat videos online. I mean robots will eventually replace that too, but for the next 10-20 years at least you can do pretty well being a plumber, for instance. AI can't do that... yet.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Dude, that's already started. Dunno about the rest of the world, but there's already a fully automated McDonald's in Texas.
I still have to see one
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
As silly as it may sound, I'm waiting to go see it with my brother. IMO it's totally cool. I realize times change, but robots are coming and it's not a bad thing as long as don't forget we're still human.
Anywho, you can view the inside of it via Google already: clickety and clickety . (SFW)
Edit: Actually, I stand corrected. According to dude on YouTube humans are still cooking the food... for now.
Jeremy Falcon
modified 21hrs ago.
|
|
|
|
|
There is another cooler video of a 90% automated grocery store, with several floors of matricial coded cells for different purposes and looking how a big group of mini flat robots move themselves all over the place doing 90° change of directions and ways / going on is priorized...
It was a 5 minutes news / mini reportage of a store in england (around 3 or 4 years ago)... but I haven't found it in a fast check
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Just imagine in 50 years... it's gonna be crazy.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: For the short term at least, blue collar skills are making a resurgence since for the past couple decades nobody taught their kids how to fix a tire while watching cat videos online. I mean robots will eventually replace that too, but for the next 10-20 years at least you can do pretty well being a plumber, for instance. AI can't do that... yet.
My dad retired as an auto mechanic after 41 years (same dealership during all that time), and every once in a while he makes a point of dropping by to visit some of the guys he worked with. Out of 60+ employees, there's only 2 left he still knows - everybody else left, quit, or retired.
Since before my dad left 18 years ago, the owner has been running ads to find replacement mechanics, and they're still looking for people. Nobody shows up - ever. In those 18 years, the mechanics got decent raises, making roughly 2/3 more than what my dad was making on the day he left. Still it's not enough to entice anyone.
And the job isn't what it used to be. Now everybody uses a laptop hooked up to the car, it runs the diagnostics and tells you what to replace. The job as a mechanic is now just to replace the parts the computer tells you. Clearly the writing's on the wall.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Robotics definitely gonna be a thriving industry at least. 
Has been for decades, of course, I still recall the 70's adverts for cars "handbuilt by robots". Of course he blue collar assembly jobs went, and that caused a big shift and not a little unease/unrest.
My biggest gripe with AI isn't with AI per se but with the attitude that it can be trained for free on the labours of others. It's almost like where a highly skilled worked is made "redundant" but then has to train their super cheap replacement to do the job in their place. We've already seen the take what you need want and if anyone complains set the lawyers on them arguments. Sort of like what we in the UK call a SLAPP.
|
|
|
|
|
Have you read the book, Linchpin: Are You Indispensible[^], (2008) by Seth Godin
By coincidence I am listening to it for the 11th time -- yes I'm serious.
I read this book twice and now I listen to it every year, at least once, since I first read it.
Here's a gem:
Linchpin: The difference between what an employee is paid and how much value she produces leads to profit. If the worker captures all the value in her salary, there’s no profit.
As a result, capitalist profit-maximizing investors have long looked for a way to turn low-wage earners into high-value producers. Give someone who makes five dollars a day an efficient machine, a well-run assembly line, and a detailed manual, and you ought to be able to make five or twenty or a thousand times what you paid in labor.
The author is not saying this is a great idea.
He is saying it is "the way the system works".
And when a system works, the people are going to work the system.
People who understand that are going to "work the system" with AI.
Yes, it is too bad. It's why we all have to grow / get skills that AI cannot reproduce easily.
I understand you are one of those who thinks this too and who has skills.
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: The difference between what an employee is paid and how much value she produces leads to profit. If the worker captures all the value in her salary, there’s no profit.
That's a pretty good quote, and accurately reflects the real-world situation.
It didn't take me long for me as a kid to realize that you're rarely paid what you think you're worth--your pay is the intersection point where you're willing to accept the minimum your employer offers.
The delusion of what some people think they're worth explains why so many people hate their jobs. Or they simply don't have the job they want (and think they can do).
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: The delusion of what some people think they're worth explains why so many people hate their jobs. Or they simply don't have the job they want (and think they can do).
You sir, just won the Internet for today. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: It didn't take me long for me as a kid to realize that you're rarely paid what you think you're worth
Agreed. You aren't paid based upon what you're worth to the company. You're paid based upon how replaceable you are.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: Have you read the book, Linchpin: Are You Indispensible[^], (2008) by Seth Godin
Haven't read it. Most of my audio books over the past few years have been market related. You've totally piqued my interest though. I'll have to put it in the queue.
raddevus wrote: By coincidence I am listening to it for the 11th time -- yes I'm serious.
That's because you're a learner, buddy. If the material is important you want to make sure it's absorbed, then relistening to books are great. Beats the hell out of watching the same movie over and over.
raddevus wrote: The author is not saying this is a great idea.
He is saying it is "the way the system works".
Tru dat. Being a bit of an economics nerd these days, I don't think producing more value than you're paid is bad. Companies have to do this too. Yes there are crap companies out there that try and scam the system, but consumers love when a company over delivers and under charges. It's called a good deal or a bargain. People only think it's bad when it's employment... because most people just want something for nothing.
IMO the problem occurs when greed gets out of hand... from the government on down. Corrupt people will always take a good system and pervert it. Even if we changed the system to something new, the incorrigible will pervert that system too. It's what they do.
raddevus wrote: And when a system works, the people are going to work the system.
You beat me to it.
raddevus wrote: Yes, it is too bad. It's why we all have to grow / get skills that AI cannot reproduce easily.
Yup, which means we need to specialize to help train AI for stuff it's not aware of yet, work on AI itself, learn prompt engineering, learn two industries (tech and something else) since AI isn't there yet, or learn soft skills. The clock is ticking and I'd be shocked if in 20 years some of these run of the mill LOB jobs still exist.
raddevus wrote: I understand you are one of those who thinks this too and who has skills.
Thanks buddy. I think that's we jive. You give the impression you're a lifelong learner too. Adapt or die. Always been the way, will be the way in our lifetime for sure.
Jeremy Falcon
modified yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I don't think producing more value than you're paid is bad. Companies have to do this too.
As they should. Companies are in business to make a profit, not to ensure people are employed.
There are no solutions, only trade-offs. - Thomas Sowell
A day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes)
|
|
|
|
|
Remember them well. My wife's aunt was one. Had to learn a new skill.
Pick up our first phone and the operator said "number please". Was a party line. No dial or keypad. I think our first phone number was something like 264.
Anyone left ponders old enough to remember ads that said: "In New Jersey, dial Bigelow 8-1234"?
How about the Acme Buggy Whip Company? If AI had been around back then, it would have said that the world would be knee deep in horse manure by now. 
>64
It’s weird being the same age as old people. Live every day like it is your last; one day, it will be.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
