loadingreadyrun.com

There was a really interesting subject on the most recent Freakonomics podcast. I highly recommend you check it out. It's about the automation of jobs, and whether anybody has job security now that we are giving more and more jobs to robots. That had me wondering, what do you guys think? I, personally, think they missed the big, obvious point here, which is that maybe people will be able to work less. Maybe capitalism won't be the only way to make an economic system fair, but free. One speaker did mention the "no work" philosophy rather dismissively, and the subject of a guaranteed wage was brought up. Still, I would like to see it discussed more in-depth on Freakonomics.

Feel free to discuss other job security related topics.

Also, let's do a poll for fun.

In terms of automation, I think I'm pretty safe — I'm a novelist, and since it's a job built around creativity, it would require incredibly advanced computers to put out consistently human-level work. Not saying it could never happen, but I think there will always be a place and an interest in human-created art of all sorts.

Now, job security in the other sense, that's a lot less likely. Barring a surprise bestseller, it's incredibly unlikely that I'll be able to live off what I make from this line of work. I'm giving it some more time to chase that dream, but in the not too distant future I may have to put it all aside for a while and find a job that can actually pay bills.

I'm a dishwasher. Robots already exist that could do my job.

I didn't read the OP, so I assumed it was H&S related.

It's not safe because you can die easily as a plumber or seriously hurt yourself if you're not smart. One of my tutors had permanently damaged their back because they tried wall mounting a boiler with a step-up in a stupid way.

A plumber in the UK nearly died from electrocution because he was derping the maintaining a boiler on Christmas eve.

Plumbing badly can kill people.
-
Plumbing is safe with regards to not being automated by robots. Seriously... would you want a robot to install a plumbing system that could kill you if done poorly? At least with human beings you hope they have been trained appropriately and have basic moral core that stops them being murderers.

Art is about human existence. Automated art does and will exist, but will never be dominant.

If you're a Christian, you might even think it's the fact that we were made in God's image and we too are pleased when we make things. That we too are "well pleased" when looking at creations. Automation takes this trail of out of it.

While I was working, I was in Tech Support. That's a job that will never go away, since you'll always need humans to make sure the robots are working correctly.

Our jobs should have been eliminated by now according to Scientific American circa 1973. I'm not holding my breath.

Web dev here, so probably it will be one of the last ones to go. General changes in the industry are more likely to push me out of a job (or more likely, into a different niche or other IT-related role) than automation/AI.

Not that I wouldn't mind seeing it go.

A lot of jobs could already be automated, but then what would the humans do? I work in bureaucracy, and a lot of what we do is fucking up things so that other people have something to do.

They haven't made an AI that can teach yet. At least, not an AI that can teach well.

AIs and robots could take over every job; however robots don't vote so it's safe to say that humans seeking jobs will always be a priority.

Cook; dealing with enough unpredictability and requiring enough creativity and improvisation that I'm quite confident the job will outlive me...for better or worse.

What Jamfalcon said. It may not make a living wage, or a difference, or mean anything to anyone but me, but at least no imaginable robot can do it for me.

Currently writing/waiting for response on applications for PhD placements... so pretty much completely replacable until I get something... If (in 3-4 years) I get a job in my field afterwards, well, I'm applying for neuroscience (more precisely neural stem cell/neurogenersis research) PhD positions...

Valkyrie-Lemons wrote:AIs and robots could take over every job; however robots don't vote so it's safe to say that humans seeking jobs will always be a priority.

Do you think that might be a little short-sighted? Is it possible that people won't want to work?

I'm in the newspaper industry.

vgmaster831 wrote:

Valkyrie-Lemons wrote:AIs and robots could take over every job; however robots don't vote so it's safe to say that humans seeking jobs will always be a priority.

Do you think that might be a little short-sighted? Is it possible that people won't want to work?

As long as capitalism exists, there will be poor people, and there will be people who need to work.

Fayili wrote:

vgmaster831 wrote:

Valkyrie-Lemons wrote:AIs and robots could take over every job; however robots don't vote so it's safe to say that humans seeking jobs will always be a priority.

Do you think that might be a little short-sighted? Is it possible that people won't want to work?

As long as capitalism exists, there will be poor people, and there will be people who need to work.

Does anyone else think we might see a shift in our entire economy that would warrant looking at alternatives to capitalism?

Haven't listened to the latest Freakonomics yet, but CGP Grey covered this as well: [url]Human's Need Not Apply[/url]
As you might guess from the title, he's not optimistic.

I'm in an IT/Dev type of job, so I should be fine for now.

vgmaster831 wrote:Does anyone else think we might see a shift in our entire economy that would warrant looking at alternatives to capitalism?

Problem isn't that capitalism isn't working, it's working just perfectly. Too much power is built into the institutions of capitalism for it come about that way, eventually capitalism will die of it's own accord, whether it's before it kills us is a different question.

Capitalism benefits the rich. The rich control the world. It will never die.

I'm in customer care... so as long as there's idiots & people who refuse to evolve with technology... my job is relatively secure against automation (performance is another story).

However, I wished there was some robots to "deal" with customers who are "special" & need "extra attention"... I wonder if Kathleen's "mail sorter" is still available.

fantôme wrote:Capitalism benefits the rich. The rich control the world. It will never die.

No, it will die on it's own, because it relies on infinite growth to be sustainable, and in a world with finite resources that is impossible. But as I said, it is a question of whether capitalism(and the rich)kill us before it dies or not.

Capitalism as it stands indeed does have major problems;

1. World Resources running out.
2. Finite Lifespans humans have to buy/experience products.

#1 can be reduced by increased virtualisation. Future Augmented Reality HMDs might help this a lot by replacing more and more goods we dont need to touch.

But #2 is pretty solid. No matter how many real products we swap for digital, theres only so much buying we will want to do.

So constant growth is impossible to sustain as long as these two remain true. Yet essentially every economy in the world is currently set up to need that growth.

Even without automation replacing "100 worker jobs with 1 maintainer", it simply cant last :-/

I only hope some countries start experimenting with different systems soon.
Maybe Switzerland will try that Basic Income scheme?

We need large scale test cases to see workable economy's we can transition too.

There will, imho, always be at least a few jobs. But we need systems that can support 90% out of work at any one time.
And we shouldn't blame automation either - LESS WORK for humans IS A FUNDAMENTALLY GOOD THING. Its only our own society's systems messing it up and making it bad.

---

My own thinking is maybe put a cap on maximum amount someone can earn per hour - forcing the highest paying jobs to be split up between more people. (obviously relatively to the skill market, not a one-size-fits-all value).

This would also help the robot situation a little. Rather then 1 person earning 100 times more because they replaced 100 jobs. It would be 100 people earning the exact same but working 100 times less hours each year. Essentially "getting extremely rich" is no longer a thing, but as you get more skilled and go up the pyramid you get more and more free time. Time, rather then money, becomes the reward of doing better.
(again, obviously simplified)

One of the biggest problems with the current capitalist system is that its not a capitalist system.

"the market" is so twisted and asininely regulated that it doesn't work correctly.

In a capitalist system when banks lost 500 bazillion dollars, they would have gone away.

The US Government pumps huge subsidies into the system for already profitable companies that would be less profitable some of which would fail to diversify the market.

The US Government has bailed out a wide variety of corporations and industries that would have failed "in the market place" because they took too big of risks and didn't consider the market.

Because of these actions by the US governments other industrial governments are forced to do similar things to allow their native companies to compete in the global market.

Also my job is raising children and sitting on my butt. I doubt thats going to be replaced.