4 ms·

Machines have been automating away jobs for centuries. What's unprecedented about what's happening (or about to happen) now? I don't see it.

by harryh 10y ago

kross 10y ago
Scale.
- harryh 10y ago
  Basically everyone used to be a farmer. Now almost no one is (in the US at least). That's not scale?
  - kross 10y ago
    That was a (relatively speaking) slow change. Upcoming automation as I see it will displace large numbers of jobs in multiple sectors in a matter of years not decades.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      Besides, a transition that happened two times in the past so that people still needed for jobs (farmers -> factory workers, factories -> services) is by no means necessary to continue happening indefinitely.
      - purplelobster 10y ago
        Exactly. services -> art, entertainment, pewdiepie, e-sports? Of course there might be new occupations around the corner, but given that most of every material and cultural need is already satisfied, except for eternal life, I don't see what occupations billions of people could transition to that people or businesses would pay money for.
        randomdata 10y ago
        > but given that most of every material and cultural need is already satisfied Couldn't that be said in every point in history? Were the farmers losing their jobs in the early 1900s thinking to themselves, "man, I could really go for an interconnected network of computers right now"? I'd be surprised if it even crossed their mind. But eventually, with not having to work on the farm anymore, they had the time to sit back and come up with the idea and implementation. Now, in 2016, it is difficult to imagine living without it. I find it hard to believe we've reached the pinnacle of human achievement.
        dota_fanatic 10y ago
        The pinnacle of human invention will be that which our (automated, intelligent) children invent. We will be indirectly responsible, but we won't be able to compete. We can already this happening eg in healthcare technology, or with AlphaGo. It's not hard to imagine many of the greatest discoveries will be via abstractions we can't even grok, and will need to be "translated" for us to even begin to understand, much like with the cutting edge of mathematics and physics. For the vast majority of humans, what they can reasonably accomplish in their lifetimes is surpassed by automated systems today, at least that which pertains to the things that in the past were requisite for everything to function (farming, transportation, common services like cooking, cleaning, etc). It's not hard to imagine the need for paying jobs will drop to zero as everything humans normally need is captured by monopolistic automated systems. From whence comes the need to take care of our own? What's to stop most humans from becoming like the horse, that which no longer has capitalistic meaning? Our overwhelming love for each other (/sarcasm)?
eximius 10y ago
Theoretically, there can be an inflection point when society cannot keep up or something. Or it could be a sudden thing when our Next Big Thing was the final piece of the puzzle. I'd say its impossible to predict but I won't dismiss it and I think we should prepare for it.
- chiefalchemist 10y ago
  That's key. To say "people will do the work that requires more intelligence" is easy to say. This issue is that IQ tipping point is nudging up. What good is an IQ of 100 in a world made for 110 and up? This friction starts when the 100s "push back." You don't have to be a genius to raise hell, do you?
coldtea 10y ago
Obviously the fact that they can automate jobs with NO replacement now. Previously we just shifted from the fields to the factories, and when that was done, to the offices and service industry. If those are done too, there will be few, or no, replacements. There's no contract we signed with the universe or the "laws of economy" that there will always be new jobs found to replace automated ones.
- harryh 10y ago
  Before that shift from the fields to the factories there were no factories. Most people couldn't conceive of what people would do if they weren't farming not to mention all the wacky things that people do today. Certainly there is no contract with the universe, but seeing as how people have pretty much worked most of the time for all of human history it seems like the height of hubris to think that RIGHT NOW things are going to fundamentally change.
  - kefka 10y ago
    Humans are too... polarizing to discuss. Lets take horses. They were essential for many areas, for a very long time. Once a horseless carriage was constructed, horse ownership declined. After a tipping point, the cost for a horse, in terms of food, water, lodging cost more than the horseless carriage. Eventually, horses were unemployable. They were still animals - strong animals at that. But the cost of maintenance and upkeep was more than they could output. So many went to the sausage and glue factories. Some people still have them, and they are huge money-sinks. Their owners know it, and budget accordingly. But none use them for actual labor - machines are much more efficient. So, what do we do when human labor is less than the resources to keep said human alive? Sausage/glue factories for them as well? (edit: spelling)
    - welanes 10y ago
      > what do we do when human labor is less than the resources to keep said human alive? Sausage/glue factories for them as well? The Soylent factory for me, please! But to answer your question: there's going to have to be a rewrite of taxation and laws - see experiments with basic income - to cater for a world in which wealth is still being created but is being distributed less as the labour isn't required. Whomever commands the robots of the future is probably looking at a big tax bill.
SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
The difference is the speed at which we can automate new jobs: we've greatly improved and substabtially automated automation. It's not that automation will eliminate all jobs, just that automation will eliminate most jobs in every field faster than humans can be trained to do them. The worry is that humans will become the horses of the 21st century -- and we seem on track to be. Understandably, many humans are concerned by this prospect.
chiefalchemist 10y ago
Away is only half the story. If you get another job NBD. The cycle continues. And up until now, you're right. AI is not just tools. AI replaces brains as well. This breaks the cycle. You know what they saw about past results and future returns? Apply that heavy and frequently.

Machines have been automating away jobs for centuries. What's unprecedented about what's happening (or about to happen) now? I don't see it.

by harryh 10y ago

Machines have been automating away jobs for centuries. What's unprecedented about what's happening (or about to happen) now? I don't see it.

kross 10y ago

Scale.

harryh 10y ago
Basically everyone used to be a farmer. Now almost no one is (in the US at least). That's not scale?
- kross 10y ago
  That was a (relatively speaking) slow change. Upcoming automation as I see it will displace large numbers of jobs in multiple sectors in a matter of years not decades.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    Besides, a transition that happened two times in the past so that people still needed for jobs (farmers -> factory workers, factories -> services) is by no means necessary to continue happening indefinitely.
    - purplelobster 10y ago
      Exactly. services -> art, entertainment, pewdiepie, e-sports? Of course there might be new occupations around the corner, but given that most of every material and cultural need is already satisfied, except for eternal life, I don't see what occupations billions of people could transition to that people or businesses would pay money for.
      - randomdata 10y ago
        > but given that most of every material and cultural need is already satisfied Couldn't that be said in every point in history? Were the farmers losing their jobs in the early 1900s thinking to themselves, "man, I could really go for an interconnected network of computers right now"? I'd be surprised if it even crossed their mind. But eventually, with not having to work on the farm anymore, they had the time to sit back and come up with the idea and implementation. Now, in 2016, it is difficult to imagine living without it. I find it hard to believe we've reached the pinnacle of human achievement.
        dota_fanatic 10y ago
        The pinnacle of human invention will be that which our (automated, intelligent) children invent. We will be indirectly responsible, but we won't be able to compete. We can already this happening eg in healthcare technology, or with AlphaGo. It's not hard to imagine many of the greatest discoveries will be via abstractions we can't even grok, and will need to be "translated" for us to even begin to understand, much like with the cutting edge of mathematics and physics. For the vast majority of humans, what they can reasonably accomplish in their lifetimes is surpassed by automated systems today, at least that which pertains to the things that in the past were requisite for everything to function (farming, transportation, common services like cooking, cleaning, etc). It's not hard to imagine the need for paying jobs will drop to zero as everything humans normally need is captured by monopolistic automated systems. From whence comes the need to take care of our own? What's to stop most humans from becoming like the horse, that which no longer has capitalistic meaning? Our overwhelming love for each other (/sarcasm)?

eximius 10y ago

Theoretically, there can be an inflection point when society cannot keep up or something. Or it could be a sudden thing when our Next Big Thing was the final piece of the puzzle. I'd say its impossible to predict but I won't dismiss it and I think we should prepare for it.

chiefalchemist 10y ago
That's key. To say "people will do the work that requires more intelligence" is easy to say. This issue is that IQ tipping point is nudging up. What good is an IQ of 100 in a world made for 110 and up? This friction starts when the 100s "push back." You don't have to be a genius to raise hell, do you?

coldtea 10y ago

Obviously the fact that they can automate jobs with NO replacement now. Previously we just shifted from the fields to the factories, and when that was done, to the offices and service industry. If those are done too, there will be few, or no, replacements. There's no contract we signed with the universe or the "laws of economy" that there will always be new jobs found to replace automated ones.

harryh 10y ago
Before that shift from the fields to the factories there were no factories. Most people couldn't conceive of what people would do if they weren't farming not to mention all the wacky things that people do today. Certainly there is no contract with the universe, but seeing as how people have pretty much worked most of the time for all of human history it seems like the height of hubris to think that RIGHT NOW things are going to fundamentally change.
- kefka 10y ago
  Humans are too... polarizing to discuss. Lets take horses. They were essential for many areas, for a very long time. Once a horseless carriage was constructed, horse ownership declined. After a tipping point, the cost for a horse, in terms of food, water, lodging cost more than the horseless carriage. Eventually, horses were unemployable. They were still animals - strong animals at that. But the cost of maintenance and upkeep was more than they could output. So many went to the sausage and glue factories. Some people still have them, and they are huge money-sinks. Their owners know it, and budget accordingly. But none use them for actual labor - machines are much more efficient. So, what do we do when human labor is less than the resources to keep said human alive? Sausage/glue factories for them as well? (edit: spelling)
  - welanes 10y ago
    > what do we do when human labor is less than the resources to keep said human alive? Sausage/glue factories for them as well? The Soylent factory for me, please! But to answer your question: there's going to have to be a rewrite of taxation and laws - see experiments with basic income - to cater for a world in which wealth is still being created but is being distributed less as the labour isn't required. Whomever commands the robots of the future is probably looking at a big tax bill.

SomeStupidPoint 10y ago

The difference is the speed at which we can automate new jobs: we've greatly improved and substabtially automated automation. It's not that automation will eliminate all jobs, just that automation will eliminate most jobs in every field faster than humans can be trained to do them. The worry is that humans will become the horses of the 21st century -- and we seem on track to be. Understandably, many humans are concerned by this prospect.

chiefalchemist 10y ago

Away is only half the story. If you get another job NBD. The cycle continues. And up until now, you're right. AI is not just tools. AI replaces brains as well. This breaks the cycle. You know what they saw about past results and future returns? Apply that heavy and frequently.