Weekend Open Forum: Should we be worried about robots taking human jobs?

[midian182]

It’s been estimated that over a third of all jobs could be lost through automation from robots and artificial intelligences over the next 20 years. As technology advances and machines get smarter and cheaper, should we be worried about the human cost?

Thanks to tech such as food-delivering robots, self-driving cars and tractors, and advanced AI, an ever-increasing number of professions, including those that were previously thought to be safe from automation, now appear to be at risk – though workers with lower levels of education are the ones most likely to be replaced by machines.

Bill Gates thinks taxing the companies that make the robots is the best solution. With the money going toward retraining staff for jobs that require human empathy and understanding.

What’s your opinion on the situation? Should firms creating these technologies do more to help the workers that are being replaced? Is automation, by no means a new thing, part of the inevitable advancement of humanity? Or will this lead to a Skynet-style overlord AI that turns us all into living batteries? Whatever your thoughts, do let us know.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/68649-weekend-open-forum-worried-about-robots-taking-human.html

 

[Brock Kane]

Yes, I agree. For every human replaced by a robot, there should be a tax! Why should typical Corporate American Greed cause someone to lose their job! If this keeps happening, there will be one person running a company that used to pay 100's of humans to provide for their families. That one person reaping the money, well, along with their "shareholders" of course!

Good example - Amazon! Robots mostly run their shipping facilities all over the world. Look how "Bloody Rich" Amazon is!

Now they want to deliver with Drones. Shipping drivers must be nervous! Not to mention the driver-less Rigs that are now here as well!

 

[psycros]

I'm not sure why this is even debated. Anyone who's not completely naive understands that capitalist companies will do almost anything to save a buck, and their biggest expenditures are payroll and benefits. Replacing workers with machines eliminates both, as well as a lot of potential liability (worker's comp, etc). Big business is so eager to cut jobs that they will even try to use automation when it doesn't work very well, which sometimes drives away customers. For over 40 years we've witnessed the migration of jobs away from skilled, properly compensated workforces to the inevitable domain of the machine. Outsourcing, off-shoring, in-shoring, hiring illegal aliens - the relentless march towards a massive unemployed population has went virtually unopposed. Its not just to the loss of employment, which charlatans like Bill Gates try to gloss over that's the issue: its the loss of human dignity and self-respect that comes from supporting yourself. The idea that future generations will be eager to work in nursing homes and other low-paying jobs where machines aren't practical is beyond absurd. When you consider the level of entitlement that kids today grow up with, the road ahead looks like the expressway to anarchy and societal breakdown. Perhaps that's what the wannabe plantation lords like Gates are hoping for: after all, a total collapse would make it easier to bring about their visions of worldwide totalitarian feudalism.

 

[Rippleman]

Although far from the "beginning of the end" for jobs, it will happen eventually and it will be a good thing. Instead of the daily rat race competition for a paycheck, humanity will see what is really important... life and enjoyment of the short time humans are alive. Instead of slaving away for a corporation, you will work (not slave) for the betterment of humanity and personal position. While we can never get rid of "currency", it can be changed to be more liner to based on effort and ability rather then luck and family line.

 

[failquail]

"Should we be worried about robots taking human jobs?"

No, what we need to worry about is accounting for the increasing automation of jobs and plan around it.

We can go the rightwing way, where jobs are required for basic subsistence and automation automates the jobs away leaving people to destitution.

Or we can go the the universal basic income way and work with it for the betterment of everyone...

Sadly, the nasty rightwing dystopia option is the only game in town right now

 

[BadThad]

The greater fear.....Terminator....or worse, The Matrix.

 

[Jefriey Marte]

I think not, we should worry about the companies that want to reduce manpower in order to increase net profit. Inverstors getting rich and people losing their job.

 

[hahahanoobs]

Its not just to the loss of employment, which charlatans like Bill Gates try to gloss over that's the issue: its the loss of human dignity and self-respect that comes from supporting yourself. The idea that future generations will be eager to work in nursing homes and other low-paying jobs where machines aren't practical is beyond absurd. When you consider the level of entitlement that kids today grow up with, the road ahead looks like the expressway to anarchy and societal breakdown. Perhaps that's what the wannabe plantation lords like Gates are hoping for: after all, a total collapse would make it easier to bring about their visions of worldwide totalitarian feudalism.

https://www.techspot.com/news/68221-bill-gates-job-stealing-robots-pay-taxes.html

 

[CobraA1]

First of all - AI predictions have had a rather notorious history of being rather inaccurate. I'm not saying I don't believe them at all, but I remain a bit skeptical.

Second of all, the biggest barriers to AI tend to be our understanding of how AI ought to work, or rather lack thereof. Time has proven again and again that AI is not a mere "throw more computational power at it" type of problem.

Third of all - if AI does indeed become more intelligent than we are, then jobs are likely to be the least of our problems. There hasn't bee much positive news in the realm of "how can we make hyperintelligent AI work for the good of mankind." To be honest, we probably shouldn't even try to make hyperintelligent AI to begin with.

That said - assuming AI doesn't simply wipe mankind, it is indeed possible AI could affect jobs.

The way I see it, there are two ultimate paths:

The first possible path is a move towards entertainment, nostalgia, and jobs as a fundamental right. People push out content because it's what they like to do, and other people will consume it. "Created by people" might become valued, even if it is a bit cruder.

Also, "do-nothing jobs" might become the norm as well. You get paid to basically exist. Maybe you do some value-add stuff like take surveys or market a product. This may require a change in culture, as currently employers are largely against the idea of hiring people that don't do much at all. Maybe having a job becomes a fundamental right, so employers are forced to put people into jobs.

The second possible path is the "you get paid by the government to exist" path. Universal basic income. My biggest fear with that is that its effect on the economy is unclear. Okay, so it is estimated that 1/3 of jobs may be lost to automation in 20 years, but what kind of impact is universal basic income going to have on the other 2/3?

What's the effect on the job market? How much will people get paid when they do have a job? What's the effect on the demand for goods/services? The supply of goods/services? The price of goods/services? How much will the average household be able to afford? What happens when some segment of the population wants a new thing (such as a video game console), but another segment doesn't? What happens when one segment of the population has different needs than another segment? Should the basic income vary by region?

Do we have any facts and figures to answer all of the questions?
Do we have any facts and figures about the first path I proposed as well?

 

[Evernessince]

I'm not sure why this is even debated. Anyone who's not completely naive understands that capitalist companies will do almost anything to save a buck, and their biggest expenditures are payroll and benefits. Replacing workers with machines eliminates both, as well as a lot of potential liability (worker's comp, etc). Big business is so eager to cut jobs that they will even try to use automation when it doesn't work very well, which sometimes drives away customers. For over 40 years we've witnessed the migration of jobs away from skilled, properly compensated workforces to the inevitable domain of the machine. Outsourcing, off-shoring, in-shoring, hiring illegal aliens - the relentless march towards a massive unemployed population has went virtually unopposed. Its not just to the loss of employment, which charlatans like Bill Gates try to gloss over that's the issue: its the loss of human dignity and self-respect that comes from supporting yourself. The idea that future generations will be eager to work in nursing homes and other low-paying jobs where machines aren't practical is beyond absurd. When you consider the level of entitlement that kids today grow up with, the road ahead looks like the expressway to anarchy and societal breakdown. Perhaps that's what the wannabe plantation lords like Gates are hoping for: after all, a total collapse would make it easier to bring about their visions of worldwide totalitarian feudalism.

And yet we see a rise in other occupations like YouTubers, Computer Engineers, ect. The only thing being drained is low skill jobs.

"Perhaps that's what the wannabe plantation lords like Gates are hoping for: after all, a total collapse would make it easier to bring about their visions of worldwide totalitarian feudalism"

Why would they need feudalism for jobs already done by machines?

 

[Jack007]

Yes very much so cause they are much more efficient doing repetive jobs and much more faster doing complex work also. from seeing what robots do I say yes the whole world should be worried. we humans just have to do the more complex work robots cant yet do

 

[johnehoffman]

Following this "logic," we should tax wheels and shovels because they let one person do more than could be done without them, and thus eliminate jobs.

Automation lets people do more work than they could do before and thus produce more at lower cost. We all benefit from the development of labor saving devices which have resulted in a standard of living unthinkable in our grandparents' time, let alone centuries ago.

Until all needs and wants are met--which will likely never happen--there will always be work to be done and jobs for people with the skills to do them. Unfortunately, we have far too many people--and government officials who encourage them--who'd rather sit around doing nothing useful and live off the efforts of those who are working, rather than get off their asses and learn to do something productive.

 

[turismozilla]

They took our jerbs!

 

[Bruce V Wayne]

LOL....what a nice little imagination Rob Thubron has. Robots taking over for humans? LOL. No, it won't. Whatever goods and services these robots are producing, who are they going to be sold to? To those people who lost their jobs and won't be able to afford it?

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

I don't know whether the author is serious about the topic but I guess if all he does is research and writing then possibly yes, he could be worried about his future because a machine could easily replace him. As for me, not in the least bit. I'm retired these days anyway.

 

[RedGuard]

If production costs drop because you don't have to pay the robot, then the price of the product drops.

Also you still need to sell the product to someone. So in the end with the government social monthly contribution of $100 you'll be able to afford more than with today's $10,000.

 

[namesrejected]

I agree with the idea that robots will eventually take jobs from humans, and that's not always a bad thing. Robots are much better to send into hazardous situations for example, but I want to touch on another part of the problem that hasn't been mentioned, if it has I have missed it. Population is part of the issue too. This would not be as big of an issue If more people would be responsible enough to use contraception. I agree that companies producing robots should be taxed, but I also think that families with more than 3 children should be taxed too. I'm just saying the robots taking jobs is only part of the problem. There is also the problem of not having enough jobs for everybody in the first place.

 

[Cycloid Torus]

Worry? Yes.
Innovation=>Turmoil=>Transition
If we can accurately forecast the state of things after Transition, we may be able to reduce the Turmoil.

We certainly will have all three.

Along the lines of Rev Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal, we might see:
- rapidly expanding automation
- universal income
- universal birth control
- free abortion/castration
- coffin sized compartment housing
- predictive incarceration
- geronticide
- violent blood sports
- free opioids and hallucinagens
- soylent green

Whatever develops, we will have to cope with:
- >10 billion people (now 7 billion)
- >4 billion starving (now 1 billion)
- <3 million elite
https://ourworldindata.org/world-population-growth/

Self-replicating machines may provide a utopia, but probably only for the elite.

Check back with me in 50 years.

 

[dirtyferret]

I for one welcome our new robot overlords.

 

[Jefriey Marte]

If production costs drop because you don't have to pay the robot, then the price of the product drops.

Also you still need to sell the product to someone. So in the end with the government social monthly contribution of $100 you'll be able to afford more than with today's $10,000.

But, this doesnt apply for rent, social Security, health.

 

[RedGuard]

It apples to rent since a new building will cost maybe $1,000 since all raw materials and construction will be done by robots.

The same with medical activities once they're all robotised.

And so on. A lot of the cost comes from paying the people.

But it won't be so. A lot of things are inflated artificially. I know, I am doing just that.

 

[Lurker101]

Yes, I agree. For every human replaced by a robot, there should be a tax! Why should typical Corporate American Greed cause someone to lose their job!

Because it's not always about Corporate American Greed. Sometimes it just makes sense to replace the most menial and mundane jobs with robots. I work for a Japanese company in Britain with robots every shift and they're there because it makes sense to have them there.

 

[MonkeyBoyX8000]

The only people that should be worried are the old stooges who fail to adapt and adopt. New job skills and a new model of education or at least an adapted model of education will be needed. I see more private company involvement in the education and continuing education departments.

 

[Brock Kane]

Yes, I agree. For every human replaced by a robot, there should be a tax! Why should typical Corporate American Greed cause someone to lose their job!

Because it's not always about Corporate American Greed. Sometimes it just makes sense to replace the most menial and mundane jobs with robots. I work for a Japanese company in Britain with robots every shift and they're there because it makes sense to have them there.

Lot of families rely on those "menial and mundane jobs"

 

[ET3D]

We've already lost lamp lighters, horse groomers and many other jobs which became irrelevant as technology progressed, but we haven't grown short of work due to new jobs coming up. This trend might continue.

In any case, a robot tax would be stupid. If big corporations paid taxes like most people, the government would have all the money needed to support people any way it would like. But they don't and they won't. This tax would only hurt small companies, and make them even less competitive with the corporations.

It's a good thing to consider what to do with people who won't find work as a result of automation, but a robot tax isn't the solution.