8 ms·
It's not that great. Remember that a real person used to do this work, and they've been replaced by a buggy robot in the name of cost savings. That's one fewer
by ddevault 6y ago
It's not that great. Remember that a real person used to do this work, and they've been replaced by a buggy robot in the name of cost savings. That's one fewer job on the market. That real person would also have been able to do things like direct the camera to follow whatever was most important - even if it wasn't happening next to the ball.
- chmod775 6y agoPeople need to realize that we're quickly heading towards a world that won't need as much human labor as we have available. And that's a good thing. There's only so many bullshit paper-pushing jobs and useless over-budget infrastructure projects we can create to make up for the lack of work. A better way to deal with too much labor on the market would be setting government-mandated maximum work-hours, so as to spread the amount of available work evenly among the entire populace. Secondly - for those countries where this isn't a reality yet - school and university should be free and you should receive government aid while attending them, to allow those out of a job to learn new skills or just pursue their interests.
- kzrdude 6y agoIt's only a good thing if we can turn around our societies to handle this new reality and where we can keep our political and enconomical freedoms, including of course a chance at a decent living
- Viliam1234 6y agoA four-day workweek would be a nice start.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y agoThat'd be better for us, sure, but I think it is more likely that those at the top will will simply find a way to reduce the excess labor class.
- giovannibonetti 6y agoI want to believe in that, however I've witnessed a few times Parkinson's Law [1] taking place. TLDR: Often after tech makes bureaucracy paperwork easier, some bureaucrats create more paperwork to compensate that, because they want more control over what is going on the office. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law
- sfifs 6y agoSure but you also need a different economic system to handle this sort of reality. Without a change, this will lead us to extreme wealth disparity and social unrest. It will be interesting to understand which countries will go with mitigations that reduces disparity vs. use increasing levels of force to keep the haves protected from have nots
- Procrastes 6y agoWhile I don't disagree with your main point, I think climate change mitigation is going to require great than 100% employment, moving whole populations, building dams and levees, digging super-tornado bunkers. Fun times!
- chmod775 6y agoThis is a definitive possibility and an interesting point, not sure why you're being downvoted.
- Camas 6y agoCan't tell the difference between a head and a ball but will definitely be replacing billions of jobs any day now.
- bumby 6y ago>useless over-budget infrastructure projects Isn’t infrastructure chronically underfunded? https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/2016-FTA-Report-Close-the-Gap.pdf https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/wp-content/uploads/...
- chmod775 6y ago>Isn’t infrastructure chronically underfunded? Both can be true at the same time. There's really no contradiction here, the opposite in fact. Infrastructure being underfunded may very well be a symptom of infrastructure projects becoming way too expensive.
- bumby 6y agoFair enough. I would agree that, in general, we as a society are very bad at cost estimating large projects which tends to make them have budget shortfalls.
- bradknowles 6y agoIt’s a good thing, right up until it’s your job that gets replaced, and you can’t find another job, so you end up becoming homeless.
- crististm 6y agoSo you figured out what a massive mass of people able to work, with enough time on their hands and nothing to do will come to? Cause it's strange to consider that a 'good thing'.
- sokoloff 6y ago> setting government-mandated maximum work-hours I think you’ll find many of those actually want to work hard will bristle at that policy. Not to mention finding that hard (and undesirable IMO) to enforce on entrepreneurs.
- spicyramen 6y agoIm a big soccer fan and I agree with you. In sports most of the time something unexpected happens outside of the field: fans doing something interesting, fights, goalkeepers or managers discussing, (check Bielsa) and clearly there would be no AI that can be trained for that.
- julianlam 6y agoNo, but there's no need for AI to be trained for this either. All you need is to have the system set up so that it can be remote controlled by somebody away from the camera, if needed.
- inopinatus 6y agoBear in mind that "real person", having been relieved of this burden of work, is now free to pursue a life of leisure; realising immediately the long-cherished human dream of robot serfdom, and no doubt sitting in splendour in their fully automated luxury condo exchanging witty banter with a supercilious android butler and enjoying the soccer on TV. Or, well, trying to.
- fastball 6y agoLuddism was dumb then and it's dumb now. Stalling progress in the name of "saving the jerbs" never works in the long run. Better to pull off the band-aid quickly and find solutions that don't require humans to continue doing jobs that can be done by machines.
- mmcconnell1618 6y agoI used to think the same thing but I spent some time researching the impact of previous technological revolutions on jobs. In almost every case, more jobs end up being created. Sometimes, the automation allows products and services to be more widely consumed at lower prices leading to an increase in jobs. Sometimes new jobs are created that weren't possible before. Think about explaining the job of a YouTuber, Blogger or Reality Show Star to someone from 100 years ago. Sometimes these debates on automation end up in a fight over how the economy of Star Trek works when you have a machine that can materialize almost anything. That's an interesting rabbit hole to dive into when you ask if any random person could just ask for an Enterprise type starship to be instantly generated. What are the constraints in that economy that make it not possible? Energy?
- macintux 6y agoAs a society, more jobs is great. As individuals, the situation may not be great: your career is gone, and now what do you do? Greeter at Walmart?
- jryle70 6y agoI'd argue that being a greeter at Walmart, or in general a human interaction role is exactly the role for people in an automation future. The greeter at Walmart tomorrow may also be responsible of a fleet of robots that perform cleaning duties or stock monitoring. Home and elder care may employ a lot of people in future that are assisted by robots.
- brabel 6y agoI wouldn't be so sure... in Japan, these jobs are already being filled with robots :D https://www.softbankrobotics.com https://www.softbankrobotics.com
- Retric 6y agoEmployment has significantly more volatility than generally assumed. https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/employment-rate https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/employment-rate Some of that volatility was women entering the workforce in large numbers, but when you consider every percent represents millions of people it’s shocking how long disruptions can be.
- m463 6y agoI think kids soccer is always lacking adult volunteers. maybe this will allow more kids soccer to be played.
- LanceH 6y agoOn the other hand, a lot more places which couldn't afford a cameraman can now record their games. It's too it's all a zero sum game and the saved money will just be hidden under a mattress and not spent on anything else.
- LeifCarrotson 6y agoThat's one more person freed from having to point a camera at a ball for 90 minutes a week, free to find more fulfilling work! Perhaps the camera operator's new work could be sitting in a comfy chair, tuning the areas of interest and motion profiles of a dozen cameras around the stadium to find the best angle on the action, allowing them to track smoothly under servos, pausing for a minute to think about the pacing of the game and what plays might develop, instead of mindlessly following the ball from place to place. I'm an automation engineer, I've worked with hundreds of machine operators. They're almost universally happier after their employer gives them a better tool with which to do the work. The jobs that automated/AI equipment is replacing are not good jobs. Performing the same task for 90 minutes, much less an 8 hour shift, is awful on the body, and even worse on the mind. Humans don't make great robots, and it's not great to ask a human do a job that should be done by a robot.
- ddevault 6y agoYeah, that's not how it works. That's how you want to believe it works so you can sleep at night. In reality that person probably turned to the gig economy, with no job security, benefits, or upwards mobility, and works twice as much to put less money into savings.
- buzzerbetrayed 6y agoI love how you’re just completely making up this very specific scenario at this point.
- gentleman11 6y ago> Performing the same task for 90 minutes, much less an 8 hour shift, is awful on the body, and even worse on the mind. Humans don't make great robots, and it's not great to ask a human do a job that should be done by a robot. Then you have to take the next step and ask: why do they do it? If it’s tedious, unsatisfying, lacks prestige, and is utterly demoralizing, what possible reason could somebody have to do it? Either the worker is insane, or else...
- 6y ago
- ascorbic 6y agoDid they though? I'm not a follower of second-tier Scottish football, but were their games normally televised before this? This seems to be a COVID thing, as fans can't attend matches at the moment.
- TheOtherHobbes 6y agoA huge part of the emotional drama of soccer is outrage at the ref's poor decision making. This seems to be the disrupted version. But I don't think we need to worry until the AI says "This is pointless and I have more interesting things to do."
- lopmotr 6y agoIf you're worried about existing jobs being lost, aren't you also worried about non-existing jobs never having been created? Imagine we don't have parfocal lenses and you need multiple cameramen with all different fixed focus lenses filming different parts of the scene, or some other contrived example of less technology creating a need for more jobs. That would surely be a better world by your standard. Should we try to eliminate some technology to create extra jobs? Where is the correct balance? Do we currently have not enough cameraman jobs or too many? It won't be exactly the right amount by coincidence.
- iso1631 6y agoI tend to see these solution used where before there wouldn't be anyone to point the camera in the first place. That said I don't agree. If you can afford the technology for this type of camera and the connectivity to get it online, you can afford to pay someone £20 to point the camera for a couple of hours. It's a great opportunity for people still in school to start, and far more fulfilling than stacking shelves.