4 ms·

Being a (rational) software developer gives you an interesting edge un understanding this stuff. I've been involved in the automation of a number of things that

Being a (rational) software developer gives you an interesting edge un understanding this stuff. I've been involved in the automation of a number of things that have directly eliminated the need for human involvement and so it's something I think about often as kind of a modern Loom builder. It's chilling to think that even if the state of technology would stop today that the level of automation would continue to rise rapidly. Every time I go out of the house I'm struck by the how many humans are not really needed and could be replaced with off the shelf technology that existed several years ago. I don't think that we need to get to the point of extremely advanced AI before this starts making a dent in the economy.

rinkjustice 15y ago
Automation is already cannibalizing the manufacturing sector. Productivity is up yet employment is down dramatically. The assembly line worker is being phased out forever. Will new jobs in robotics/automation account for the old ones? Not nearly enough. Aside from a few technicians on the shop floor, I think we'll increasingly see robots building and designing other robots. Any humans that will be involved in the process will be highly skilled and able to do so by remote location. Bottom line: if you're in the manufacturing industry, you're now in the robotics industry.
- eru 15y ago
  In a sense the age of robotics has arrived in entertainment a long time earlier. While nearly all machines in manufacturing required human operators until recently, radio and TV are machines that provide their services directly to the end user.
DanI-S 15y ago
I'm not clear on why, as a rational software developer, you find this chilling. If our economic system of choice depends on there being work for everyone, our economic system will need to be changed. This can be as gradual a process as anything else, but it is already happening. Welfare didn't exist in the US 100 years ago. Far fewer people went through higher education, and there was less spare money for scholarships. Our efficiency as a species is increasing. This means that we will produce the same amount of work with less effort. If our distribution methods mean that this will cause poverty, we need to fix our distribution methods.

rinkjustice 15y ago

Automation is already cannibalizing the manufacturing sector. Productivity is up yet employment is down dramatically. The assembly line worker is being phased out forever. Will new jobs in robotics/automation account for the old ones? Not nearly enough. Aside from a few technicians on the shop floor, I think we'll increasingly see robots building and designing other robots. Any humans that will be involved in the process will be highly skilled and able to do so by remote location. Bottom line: if you're in the manufacturing industry, you're now in the robotics industry.

eru 15y ago
In a sense the age of robotics has arrived in entertainment a long time earlier. While nearly all machines in manufacturing required human operators until recently, radio and TV are machines that provide their services directly to the end user.

DanI-S 15y ago

I'm not clear on why, as a rational software developer, you find this chilling. If our economic system of choice depends on there being work for everyone, our economic system will need to be changed. This can be as gradual a process as anything else, but it is already happening. Welfare didn't exist in the US 100 years ago. Far fewer people went through higher education, and there was less spare money for scholarships. Our efficiency as a species is increasing. This means that we will produce the same amount of work with less effort. If our distribution methods mean that this will cause poverty, we need to fix our distribution methods.