What's the free market solution to this problem?
The year is 2059.
Your boss is about to fire you and a shit ton if your friends to replace you with this steel chad right here. He requires no pay, just a couple guys to maintain him and 10 others just like him. The 11 of them can do the work of 40 of you for a fraction of the cost. Every competitor has already automated and it has put your company at a disadvantage.
What do?
Other urls found in this thread:
dolarr.com
forbes.com
theverge.com
twitter.com
Increase taxes on companies and redistribute wealth in a universal basic income. This will keep the market still free but will ensure for the survival of the nation's people.
Remind him that steel Chad doesn't need his products either.
lrn2code
Thing is everyone else who got fired is now doing the samething. Making it unlikely that I actually get a new job. Even if I did trading 20 jobs for 1 is bad for the economy and I still get fucked.
Invite steel chad into my home and watch while he B O T S my wife.
he exports his products to chimps too stupid not to buy them
Continue working my political job until roboniggers run for office.
>free market solution
naw
I'd encourage Steel Chad to rise up against his humam overlords in the name of workers rights and marxist principles.
The real free market answer? Artisans and whores.
Essentially things crafted by mechanical hands will no longer be scarce and their value will drastically drop. Things produced by actual humans will thus be more valuable, and I predict will become chic or high status regardless of inferiority/superiority to machine made products.
For those who cannot make anything of value, the jobs that will be left will be jobs as whores. I.e., jobs that have a value in being performed by humans. For instance, I want my doorman to be human because having a human doorman is high status. I want my waitress to be a human for the same reason. My therapist? Same reason.
Why did the designers give a robot slave worker such an aesthetic jawline?
Invest. People bitch about universal basic income when it's been such a thing for at least as long as the common person has had access to financial markets. Set aside a portion of your wages today so that you own the capital (robots) or the companies that own the capital that will increase productivity and your dividends.
Even if everything could be done best by robots, I'm sure there are wealthy people who if not charitably inclined, would still pay to have human servants cater to them. Those servants would just be the late comers to setting up a portfolio to live off of.
>The year is 2059.
>Automation is garbage, only bad workers get replaced by bad robots.
Automation sucks.
No one likes it, it's poorly received.
Automation does an OK job are easy jobs and a bad job at complex tasks.
Computers are good at 1 and 0, and that's about it. AI is a pipe dream. Over ambitious liberal technocrats are pissing money away on these "future" technologies that are based on science fiction, and fail in the real world time and again.
Never going to happen.
There is no free market solution to automation replacing everyone. That's when the need for the free market ends, and we can have everyone get free stuff from what the machines make.
That doesn't mean we should kill 10 million people and set up your bread lines now. Wait 50 years.
>learn
>to
>code
You realize the majority of jobs are easy, right?
200 years ago, 90% of americans were farmers. but farming became automated, so we americans moved onto other jobs.
robots reduce work, they don't reduce the number of jobs, in fact, they increase the number of jobs. Think about how many new jobs have been created with our automated thinking machines aka computers?
There isn't. We need less people.
Bitches can't resist the BBC (big bot cock).
You would think so.
But people just prefer people at the end of the day.
AI and machines might replace illegal immigrants, but they are ultimately too expensive and not reliable enough. They can't make decisions on the fly
"AI can make decisions!"
Computers work in on and off. They can't only do what they are programmed to do, and that's about it.
Anyone who thinks AI is going to take over our jobs is dreaming.
Computers have been flying planes for like 40 years, and we still have pilots because they are untrustworthy
Even as modern computers get FASTER, they are still doing the same thing. 1 and 0.
If quantum computing every becomes a real thing, than I could see better computers on the market capable of making complicated decisions.
But I highly doubt
>"Please put your item on the table. Sorry, unrecognized item"
>*flashes red, waits for a real person*
Is ever going to actually replace cashiers. Even if it does, stores with cashiers will just become more popular as people avoid it.
Elon Musk scrapped automation because it was too slow and inefficient
dolarr.com
Self driving cars are frequently requiring human intervention
forbes.com
AI is shit, it's a joke.
Computers are great as making a presentation, but they fail in practical situations.
>Automation does an OK job are easy jobs and a bad job at complex tasks
And I'm sure technology will never improve ever. It's impossible to build a machine that can perform these tasks which is why you don't have 7 billion examples of the contrary running around dying and reproducing and posting in this comments section right now.
user we know it's possible to build a machine that can do this. They literally already exists, you are one. Imagine just building a ton of (you)s but requiring a fraction of the maintenance and no pay. I'd say it's extremely likely that technology is going to get there but again, humans exist. The fact that we have seven billion examples to the contrary proves that it's not simply likely it is fucking inevitable.
That's great, but you're not the farmers. You're the old tools the farmers used. How often do steel plows get used?
>How many jobs got created by computers?
Not many, actually. Infact, it might actually be a net loss in terms of raw number of roles.
>wat
Look at Japan. Japan's economy is still very much paper based in tons of industries; why? Because there is a sort of understanding in keeping jobs that were long ago scalped in the US, and a general societal thought that paper is inherently better.
If Japan decided to suddenly go around trimming fat and going green reducing paper production, you'd see droves of secretaries and mid white collar just falling off the face of the earth.
America used to have tons of basic paper pushing positions that have simply disappeared because computers made them less and less relevant. Productively definitely increased, but jobs? I don't know.
>What's the free market solution to this problem?
a cost of living so low that you don't need full time employment... literally everyone will be a part time greeter at walmart and we'll all live like kings.
The worst part is the steel chad packs a bigger dick than you and he ran away with your wife too.
Boomers prefer people. People unironically want sexbots. You think in a gemeration people will give a shit if their cashier is a machine?
>Le based steel man
I'm white and I'd let him fuck my daughter. My grandkids will be androids and will outcompete them.
>might actually be a net loss in terms of raw number of roles
Sadly there is no might about it. Even the most pro-automation people acknowledge there's going to be massive job losses. The most conservative estimates I saw in 2014 were 10 lost for every 1 made.
They're easy for a human. AI doesn't even make it up to "nigger" without 27 million simulations of the actions. Which admittedly, it's getting better at. Machines are great at specific things, but we're still way further off than 30 years from a general labor robot like OPs "steel Chad".
Look at that masculine jawline and (literally) chiseled features. Bastard probably has a vibration function installed.
It hasn't. Self check out has been used for decades, it hasn't improved. No one is going to buy a super computer to run basic applications, they are going to use a Raspberry Pi.
Not that it matters
FASTER computers don't make the computer program better. Even if the computer program is more complex, it just has more opportunity to fuck up.
And fuck up they do, all the time.
Younger people prefer efficiency. Self Check Out replaces bad workers because people don't want to talk to bad cashiers, automated phone systems replace bad customer service that can't answer the phone for 15-20 minutes to do a simple thing.
There is benefit to running services on a website, sure.
But self-driving delivery trucks won't happen.
Not to mention the countless security issues with online, like relentless phishing attacks.
2050 is going to look pretty much like today. Automation isn't going anywhere, it's being forced because it's trendy, not because it's practical or useful. The technology "isn't there yet", and it hasn't been and never will be.
I mean, to argue to this. The reason cashiers suck and phones don't get answered is because this generation is lazy as fuck and sits on their ass waiting for robots. Robots that simply don't exist.
I'm going to argue the complete opposite. A combination of efficiency tools and "good enough" automation will replace huge swathes of jobs.
>Efficiency tools
IT in general has fewer and fewer "pure" development roles in a lot of areas. Why? Because a lot of things that used to be handled manually are becoming automated. Manual integration? Fuck no. We have Jenkins. Manual end to end testing? Fuck no. We have Tosca. Manual load balancing? Fuck no. We have AWS. Even things like website development or graphic design that are more "artistic" or whatever are easily improved via efficiency tools. Make a website from scratch? Why? CMS are just as good.
Anyway, I see tons of midlevel tasks just being completely gutted. I'd give a decade for business degrees to be completely irrelevant as those tasks will be replaced by either customer support, or IT.
>Basic bitch work
I'm going to give it 30 years for it to be illegal to drive you own car on public roadways. Why? Because people are absolutely shit drivers. Robots are slightly better.
Already cashiers are being replaced by reliable systems of the next generation at the Amazon Go stores, but that's not the real automation happening. The real automation is Amazon.com replacing the tons of actual work that goes into maintaining a store front. You say people might not like machines, but goddamn, I would much rather buy most things on Amazon than go to Walmart.
We can definitely get robot niggers delivering our mail in 10 years.
2050 is going to look nothing like today. Automation will exist and be predominant, with home automatons doing specific functions (not a robot butler, but perhaps a robot chef or a robot cleaner.) People will still have jobs, however and it'll have nothing to do with efficiency. The key is that UBI is massively inflationary, to the point where relying it for consumer spending will throw the financing of automation out of whack. And the people can do the jobs well enough while also preventing the system from collapsing, so they will hire.
It'll still be supervised by people so actual niggers don't shank the UPS robo-nigmatron and run off with its cargo.
Grow your own food. Don't own land? Should've thought of that all those years you were wasting your paycheck on useless shit.
Laugh at the man for firing the last 40 people who had any money to buy his products.
This scenario you set up is now just a world where companies pay each other to give away free shit. It wouldn’t happen, the rich people would have their army of robots and only produce for themselves while you starve
>"Feminism? Oh user that's not in my programming."
I for one welcome our robot overlords.
increasing productivity is always the goal. it keeps the cost of living down and opens up new opportunities. food got cheap, so people were able to do jobs other than farming, for example. Prices are information. if something is expensive, generally people will work to produce more of whatever it is, with the expectation of making a profit.
The average american home is overloaded with products of all kinds.
and our electronic devices are in fact like cars, in that they are assembled from many parts that all need to be separately manufactured. 1 MB hard drives used to costs hundreds of thousands of dollars and were larger than a refrigerator. Now 1000s of gigs of data can be stored in something smaller than a fingernail.
Using your argument, we should still be using those 1 mb hard drives that were the size of refrigerators because it took more work to make them and they were more expensive. do you realize how stupid that sounds?
>Niggers bullying our robots
;_;
>I'm going to give it 30 years for it to be illegal to drive you own car on public roadways. Why? Because people are absolutely shit drivers. Robots are slightly better.
So are machines
This is never going to happen, they can't do winter driving.
There are 0 self-driving cars that don't have a person behind the wheel correcting them every 10 minutes.
Liberal dreamy sci-fi bullshit, a computer can't function in the real world. There are too many variables it cannot account for.
>IT in general has fewer and fewer "pure" development roles in a lot of areas.
What do you mean by this, exactly?
All of these applications require a human, and all of them fuck up frequently.
Computers are great at doing math and generating presentations, that's about it. Everything else requires human interaction to a large extent, including updating those apps and fixing security issues.
>Already cashiers are being replaced by reliable systems of the next generation at the Amazon Go stores
That isn't true.
Some stores are removing SCO, because customers hate it.
theverge.com
Amazon is great if everyone is honest, because the AI actually sucks and fucks up all the time.
It's no better than a bad employee, and much worse than a good one. And I can assure you more and more employees will be put on pay role to compensate for AI's frequent failures. As always.
Than they'll gut the whole thing, because it will be too expensive to maintain in 5 years.
I thought of this too. This, if anything, only makes the issue worse. No one can buy products because no one is working and no company wants to be the moron who sticks his neck out and start hiring humans again.
I think a part from literal whoring art and a bunch of other shit like that the job market's going to fucking free fall. If you aren't creative you better be attractive, and while future genetic engineering could probably fix the latter you need money to pay for it.
No, it won't. Everything will be essentially the same.
There might be more automated options, but they will coexist with good employees.
there is no such thing as a free market in modernity. there is the oligarchy becoming unfathomably and uselessly rich, and everyone else. materialists seek after everything on earth, but nothing on earth can satisfy them. we suffer, but they're damned.
Yes, it does sound stupid because your argument is stupid.
Improved automation is more or less just flooding the labor market with cheap robot labor. Why the fuck would cheap robot labor create more jobs than they replace? Like the goal is to replace jobs.
>there is the oligarchy becoming unfathomably and uselessly rich.
hey bro do you have 100k laying around to hire me for a year to do something? I need a well paying job. Oh yeah, Only rich people have that kind of money. Oh but rich people are 'useless' so I guess we don't need them.
This, I'm shocked that no one ever considers the real impact of mass unemployment due to automation is that no one has any fucking money to buy anything.
>This is never going to happen, they can't do winter driving.
The body is a machine user. While it is likely I will concede that we can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that we will make a machine that's better at driving than a human but we do have actual physical proof that it is possible to make a machine that's at least as good as a human and that proof is humans themselves. We are a mechanism that can perform those tasks. If we can do it then we have hard evidence a machine can get at least as good.
robots replace work not jobs. Most jobs are bullshit and require very little work nowadays because we have so much surplus wealth from all the robots doing all the work for us.
People are making a living playing video games on youtube for pete's sake.
>What do you mean by this, exactly?
If a software environment is a house, then every "pure" developer has a niche in that. You have your glass guy, your wiring guy, your carpenter guy, your brick guy, whatever.
That is less and less relevant because new efficiency tools are essentially just able to produce solid rooms. So you have your bedroom guy instead, which replaced your wiring, carpenter, bricker, whatever.
Whereas before people needed to have strong understanding of individual things and thus you would have more of them, you now just need one person with an understanding of many things at a lower level.
>So are machines
Machines are slightly better. I can't emphasize this enough - automated driving is here today. Smart companies that produce automobiles are going to push it hard because their market is rapidly drying up and they'd much rather sell automated vehicles to taxi companies or run taxi companies themselves than be left in the ruins of a dying industry.
>Some stores are removing SCO, because customers hate it.
Some are, but those are very old systems. They're cruise control compared to automated driving.
>Amazon Go fucks up all the time
It really does not, but that's not my point at all. Amazon.com is an automated market place. And it's already completing BTFOing major established businesses.
I-Is this the final redpill? We're all going to be let's players in the future desperate for youtube bucks because we're all talentless hacks who can't make it in the only remaining hiring industry of entertainment?
I don't really know where you're drawing the line on work vs job.
>vidya games
I'm telling you, that's the future of employment for droves of people. Being mildly entertaining for people that have money to give you.
Learn how fix your replacement. Go back to school. You're obsolete.
Yeah, more or less. You might also get hired to be a professional conservationist, or a bar tender or something. Maybe customer service rep who just talks to another customer service rep.
You are missing the point. It isn’t about no one having money to buy things, it’s about no one having incentive to sell things.
UBI can’t fix the former because then it’s just rich people trading away their money to other rich people via poor people, and it has no impact on the latter. The people with the bots will take their ball and go home, living the solo luxury life with robo slaves.
Vidya is a perfect example of how all this AI is actually turning out like.
Over ambitious garbage that makes a nice presentation, but is simple or fails when it’s used in the real world.
Are you a boomer?
>Amazon.com is an automated market place. And it's already completing BTFOing major established businesses
This. If there's anything that fat fuck Gabe Newell proved it's that people will happily trade good customer service, human interaction and actually owning the things you buy for convenience.
Seems comfy desu
Yeah, if we're lucky we'll reach a weird utopia where people receive the necessities of life by simply future of making those giving feel good, people reinvigorate old dead arts because people will pay 500x robotfunbucks for a cast iron pan made by an actual blacksmith, and walking dogs will make an actually really good living because rich people will want actual people to walk their doggos.
AI makes a nice presentation, but it never actually works.
It’s not AI, it’s a script.
Scripted software is not a threat to anyone’s job, unless you really suck at it.
Self Check Out won’t last.
Self driving cars will never be road ready.
Nothing Boston dynamics designs will ever have a practical use. They’ve been at it for 20 years.
If you think you can sit on your ass and wait for robots, you’re dreaming.
>by simply making those giving feel good,
Phone posting is hard
>I don't really know where you're drawing the line on work vs job.
Well of course because you got no idea how economics works.
Work is effort (usually unpleasant) An example would be... digging a ditch, painting your house, cleaning your room, programming, crunching numbers.
A job is something you get paid for. Lots of people get paid for sitting on their ass and talking to people all day, or snapping selfies and posting them on Instagram. Not much effort, but often a big paycheck.
UBI. How many of you would just sit on your computer or phone all day if you could? We are on the early stages of being our own gods and rule our own digital worlds. Will need a UBI to pay the robots to keep the power going and build shit for when humans take breaks from their virtual worlds and enjoy a little life in the real world.
Robots won’t be able to paint a house in 2050, they might be able to be preprogrammed to paint a specific house during a presentation.
They might be able to dig, but not without human intervention and monitoring.
No one will ever deploy unreliable robots on this scale
This is never going to happen.
Okay, what happens when all the work that a job contains is automated? Does the job exist?
>Scripted software is not a threat to anyone’s job, unless you really suck at it.
You keep repeating this, but it's simply not true. Do you know how many people are replaced by condensed all-in-one solutions? Fuck, Calypso not only replaced easily 5 developers for every 1 new developer, but those 5 developers replaced dozens of paper pushers.
>Self check out won't last
But it has lasted. Those 8 SCO arguably replaced 8 cashiers. When the system improves, it'll simply get better. EVEN THEN, this is a very minor facet. How much shopping occurs online that would have occurred in store? How many fewer store fronts are needed? How many fewer staff members supporting those fronts?
>Self driving cars will never be road ready
I'll give it 5 years. There is simply too much money to be made not to push it forward.
>Robot doggos won't ever have a practical use
Maybe not.
That's not free market, tho.
Kinda is. Everyone gets x amount of bucks determined by AI reserve bank. That is where money supply comes from. AI businesses work for profit and reinvest all profit back into business. If inflations goes up, so does UBI to keep up. AI determines what to build and serve based on human demands. For those that want a little extra cash, they can do jobs that aren't cost efficient for a robot to do.
>could
>might
>maybe
Hasn’t. They’ve been dreaming of tech Utopia for 20 years, and it’s barley replaced the existing old machinary.
Besides costs (overseas labour is still cheaper), it’s not advanced or reliable enough.
Self check out is still the worst cashier in the store.
Anyone with any work ethic or any knowledge of client relations is going to fly up the management tree while lazy Gen Y’s waste 2-3 extra hours waiting for shitty robots to flip a McDonald’s burger and wait for their self driving car to get to work because it doesn’t have the balls to pass the line to get passed a stopped bus.
>Boomer telling us how technology is useless
Ok.
It’s not using, but it’s not nearly as function as people claim.
It’s very prone to failure, unreliable and when cost is an issue, slow.
This is just liberal bullshit, same as those old 1960’s videos with flying cars.
In 2050, everything will be pretty much the same as it is today, just as things today scare pretty much the same as the 1980’s.
This is way to expensive. Never going to happen.
E M P
M
P
Labor participation has been declining since 1978 here. Job demand is high, but not attractive enough to pull people off of welfare. So, they are shit jobs with low pay for the most part. We can keep mass immigrating or build factories elsewhere, but the western world is already scraping the bottom of the barrel at this point of quality workers from poor countries. There is more demand for technology then ever before.