4 ms·

You're being biased by presentism. In an age where robots are cheap and ubiquitous, we won't still hire cleaning ladies (interesting assumption they're still la

by wsxcde 9y ago

You're being biased by presentism. In an age where robots are cheap and ubiquitous, we won't still hire cleaning ladies (interesting assumption they're still ladies) just because they'll be able to clean under the rug. Instead, home furniture will change so that it becomes easier to clean for robots.

zigzigzag 9y ago
That hasn't happened yet though. Stock brokers, on the other hand, once the quintessential white collar job, have been completely replaced by automated trading algorithms.
- wsxcde 9y ago
  Because robots aren't cheap, at least for now. We're still at a stage where compute is cheap but interacting with real world using interfaces that go beyond screens and keyboards is still cumbersome and expensive. But coming back to stock brokers, is there an epidemic of college educated stock brokers ending up unemployed due to automation? I don't think so and that's because they have other skills they gained from their education. Automated trading algorithms don't make stock brokers useless in the same what that automated garbage collection doesn't make programmers useless.
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    It's not just that they aren't cheap. They don't exist yet.
    - wsxcde 9y ago
      What do you think roomba is, if not a house-cleaning robot? ED: yes, they're not perfect but give it about 20 years. I'm pretty sure we won't have human cleaners by then.
      - ThomPete 9y ago
        You are joking right. Have you ever had a cleaning job? A Roomba isn't going to solve your cleaning needs, not even by a longshot.
ThomPete 9y ago
No I am not being biased by anything. I said that they will get replaced AFTER radiologist will which was the point here. Longer education does not secure your position.
- wsxcde 9y ago
  If all a radiologist does is pattern matching, the market would've replaced them with techs a long time ago. If not in the US, this would've happened in at least a few other countries.
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    What else do you think a radiologist do?
    - wsxcde 9y ago
      I'm not a radiologist, so I can't answer accurately and I'm not even going to try. If you really want an answer, there's plenty of information on the web. But they're most certainly not just pattern matchers in the same way that I'm not a typist. Also what's your evidence that there's no relation between college degrees and automation? What we know for a fact is that wage growth for people without college degrees has been flat or negative for the past eight or so years, while people with college degrees have seen some wage growth. Note, this can't be explained by illegal immigration because the number of undocumented immigrants has stayed constant or declined since the beginning of the Obama-era.
      - ThomPete 9y ago
        I know a couple of radiologist so I know what they are doing and there is nothing in there that won't be possible for a AI to deal with. The reasons why it isn't being used instead of doctors are mostly political, institutional and human. First doctors will use them as assistants then they will be doing all the work. But when it comes to actually detecting the patterns which is exactly what a radiologist trains to learn computers are not only better at finding the problems they also find much subtler and thus more early stage signs. Some people in collage with collage degree have wage growth, you go ask your friend who studied english literature when they last had a pay-rise. The original claim was that collage meant more use of brain thus better job security. Thats simply wrong on both accounts.
yourapostasy 9y ago
Custodial work like a live-in housekeeper performs covers a very large range of skills I've yet to see successfully automated in a single package. Sorting/pre-treating/running laundry (including identifying dry clean items to set aside), folding and putting up clothes (including setting aside and matching missing items like socks, accessories, etc.), loading/unloading/put up dishes (including all the kitchen gadgets that go into the dishwasher), identifying and hand-washing kitchen items, dusting/cleaning (including knowing when to take care around fragile items), cleaning the kitchen,..., the list is quite long. Just folding clothes is only commercially automated in very expensive and limited contexts (can fold shirts, but not blankets), and it won't put up the items for you. There are any number of restaurants that would love a kitchen-cleaning robot that guarantees that part of the restaurant inspector's rounds is always taken care of to a consistent degree. Just a robot modified from a pick and place solution to declutter by putting up out-of-place items and remembering where everything is located would find a large market. We're nowhere near good solutions for these and many other "simple" skills, much less mass market solutions. I sometimes wonder if a giant "donut" job market will develop: many pattern-based very high-end specialties get automated, and many extremely low-end (Roomba, for example) ultra-repetitive tasks get automated, but lots of low'ish end jobs like custodial work stubbornly remain. Above the income strata of those low'ish end jobs in the middle sits a group of steadily-insecure positions as automation constantly nibbles away at their edges from the higher-end income stratas.
- stonemetal 9y ago
  >I've yet to see successfully automated in a single package Why would it need to be a single package? Is there a point to making the roomba do laundry?
  - yourapostasy 9y ago
    I want an ever-decreasing number of limited-purpose appliances and devices in my life. Personally, I want to see software and even limited AI (not to speak of general AI) fulfill a personal ideal of mine to deliver increasingly general-purpose devices, using intelligence (whether embedded by design or learned) to drive general-purpose arrangements of atoms. Initially, we will be forced by circumstance and market to adopt single-purpose robots like the Roomba if we want to avail ourselves of their benefits. But there are so many different tasks that I do not foresee a future of mass adoption of such single-purpose devices; the economics do not support such an outcome unless you imagine a near-future where most of the planet's population is compensated around the current US median household income per year.

by wsxcde 9y ago

zigzigzag 9y ago

That hasn't happened yet though. Stock brokers, on the other hand, once the quintessential white collar job, have been completely replaced by automated trading algorithms.

wsxcde 9y ago
Because robots aren't cheap, at least for now. We're still at a stage where compute is cheap but interacting with real world using interfaces that go beyond screens and keyboards is still cumbersome and expensive. But coming back to stock brokers, is there an epidemic of college educated stock brokers ending up unemployed due to automation? I don't think so and that's because they have other skills they gained from their education. Automated trading algorithms don't make stock brokers useless in the same what that automated garbage collection doesn't make programmers useless.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  It's not just that they aren't cheap. They don't exist yet.
  - wsxcde 9y ago
    What do you think roomba is, if not a house-cleaning robot? ED: yes, they're not perfect but give it about 20 years. I'm pretty sure we won't have human cleaners by then.
    - ThomPete 9y ago
      You are joking right. Have you ever had a cleaning job? A Roomba isn't going to solve your cleaning needs, not even by a longshot.

ThomPete 9y ago

No I am not being biased by anything. I said that they will get replaced AFTER radiologist will which was the point here. Longer education does not secure your position.

wsxcde 9y ago
If all a radiologist does is pattern matching, the market would've replaced them with techs a long time ago. If not in the US, this would've happened in at least a few other countries.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  What else do you think a radiologist do?
  - wsxcde 9y ago
    I'm not a radiologist, so I can't answer accurately and I'm not even going to try. If you really want an answer, there's plenty of information on the web. But they're most certainly not just pattern matchers in the same way that I'm not a typist. Also what's your evidence that there's no relation between college degrees and automation? What we know for a fact is that wage growth for people without college degrees has been flat or negative for the past eight or so years, while people with college degrees have seen some wage growth. Note, this can't be explained by illegal immigration because the number of undocumented immigrants has stayed constant or declined since the beginning of the Obama-era.
    - ThomPete 9y ago
      I know a couple of radiologist so I know what they are doing and there is nothing in there that won't be possible for a AI to deal with. The reasons why it isn't being used instead of doctors are mostly political, institutional and human. First doctors will use them as assistants then they will be doing all the work. But when it comes to actually detecting the patterns which is exactly what a radiologist trains to learn computers are not only better at finding the problems they also find much subtler and thus more early stage signs. Some people in collage with collage degree have wage growth, you go ask your friend who studied english literature when they last had a pay-rise. The original claim was that collage meant more use of brain thus better job security. Thats simply wrong on both accounts.

yourapostasy 9y ago

Custodial work like a live-in housekeeper performs covers a very large range of skills I've yet to see successfully automated in a single package. Sorting/pre-treating/running laundry (including identifying dry clean items to set aside), folding and putting up clothes (including setting aside and matching missing items like socks, accessories, etc.), loading/unloading/put up dishes (including all the kitchen gadgets that go into the dishwasher), identifying and hand-washing kitchen items, dusting/cleaning (including knowing when to take care around fragile items), cleaning the kitchen,..., the list is quite long. Just folding clothes is only commercially automated in very expensive and limited contexts (can fold shirts, but not blankets), and it won't put up the items for you. There are any number of restaurants that would love a kitchen-cleaning robot that guarantees that part of the restaurant inspector's rounds is always taken care of to a consistent degree. Just a robot modified from a pick and place solution to declutter by putting up out-of-place items and remembering where everything is located would find a large market. We're nowhere near good solutions for these and many other "simple" skills, much less mass market solutions. I sometimes wonder if a giant "donut" job market will develop: many pattern-based very high-end specialties get automated, and many extremely low-end (Roomba, for example) ultra-repetitive tasks get automated, but lots of low'ish end jobs like custodial work stubbornly remain. Above the income strata of those low'ish end jobs in the middle sits a group of steadily-insecure positions as automation constantly nibbles away at their edges from the higher-end income stratas.

stonemetal 9y ago
>I've yet to see successfully automated in a single package Why would it need to be a single package? Is there a point to making the roomba do laundry?
- yourapostasy 9y ago
  I want an ever-decreasing number of limited-purpose appliances and devices in my life. Personally, I want to see software and even limited AI (not to speak of general AI) fulfill a personal ideal of mine to deliver increasingly general-purpose devices, using intelligence (whether embedded by design or learned) to drive general-purpose arrangements of atoms. Initially, we will be forced by circumstance and market to adopt single-purpose robots like the Roomba if we want to avail ourselves of their benefits. But there are so many different tasks that I do not foresee a future of mass adoption of such single-purpose devices; the economics do not support such an outcome unless you imagine a near-future where most of the planet's population is compensated around the current US median household income per year.