# "Humans Need Not Apply" - human labor is becoming obsolete



## Just_Some_Guy

Here's a fascinating video about automation. LOTS of interesting implications. 

Watch and discuss!


----------



## WickerDeer

Really interesting!

*laughing* Maybe robots will be creating music like this one day! To empathize with us. XD






I guess what struck me was that humans can receive dopamine cycles from learning new skills. That work isn't just something we do for income, but that it helps us grow and develop. But I guess that being programmed might be similar, since I am just talking about what people might consider biological programming.

I guess the question of this possible future begs other more existential questions, and questions about the meaning of life and the value of other people and ourselves. And how to find new purpose.


----------



## LibertyPrime

^^ I see people are reading the revolution thread  awesome.



> A recent Pew Research report found that *experts are split 50/50 as to whether artificial intelligence will create or destroy jobs*. It also, more frighteningly, found that *unless our current education system drastically changes*, *the rise of robot workers is certain to lead not to a post-scarcity age of mass leisure, but "to an increase in income inequality, a continued hollowing out of the middle class, and even riots, social unrest, and/or the creation of a permanent, unemployable 'underclass.'"* - Motherboard - Meghan Neal August 13, 2014 // 10:35 PM CET


Pew Research report


----------



## Shaolu

I find the horse analogy flawed. Horses aren't employed. Not to sound like a PETA radical, but a horse "working" is more akin to slavery than it is employment. Horses do not voluntarily offer their labor in exchange for food and shelter. They are simply made to work, whether they want the human offered food and shelter or not. Otherwise they would be content to roam the countryside on their own.

I think we're really missing the big picture here if we think that employment is the end goal. It's not. If you want to give more jobs to construction workers, make them all dig manually with shovels. Want to create even more jobs? Give them all hand trowels, or make them literally dig with their hands. But is it jobs that we really wanted? Or did we just want to build something?

Let's not forget that people have personal automation devices at home. I'm typing this message with one right now. As long as we all end up with these devices, and we have devices to repair these devices, then why would we want for anything? We'd be free to do as we please, and no one would need to work. That's not a problem. That's an ideal.


----------



## DarthSkywalker

We are all very hopeful that AI will replace idiots!


----------



## Just_Some_Guy

Shaolu said:


> As long as we all end up with these devices, and we have devices to repair these devices, then why would we want for anything? We'd be free to do as we please, and no one would need to work. That's not a problem. That's an ideal.


I think this is the heart of the matter; how will we distribute resources if 40% have no employment?


----------



## Guest1234

DarthSkywalker said:


> We are all very hopeful that AI will replace idiots!


I don't understand what you mean by that, but I hope it doesn't involve Cyberdyne.


----------



## Shaolu

Just_Some_Guy said:


> I think this is the heart of the matter; how will we distribute resources if 40% have no employment?


The freer the market, the easier it is to distribute resources. The more we try to centrally manage other people's resources, the less effectively those resources are distributed. I don't see automation nearly as much of a threat to employment as government regulation.


----------



## HFGE

Technology destroys some industries and creates others. Despite what some alarmist economists like to declare, that still hasn't changed.


----------



## Tezcatlipoca

Robot Butler to be Employed by Starwoods Hotels : Business : Headlines & Global News

http://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/academic/The_Future_of_Employment.pdf

Are Wall Street Robots Killing Ordinary Investors? | Motherboard

2 billion jobs to disappear by 2030 | KurzweilAI


----------



## RobynC

Despite the fact that it could be done, the fact that it would put everybody out of jobs would be rather foolish as it would tank the economy


----------



## LibertyPrime

RobynC said:


> Despite the fact that it could be done, the fact that it would put everybody out of jobs would be rather foolish as it would tank the economy


Its a ticket to a new social order, the gap between the poor and rich will widen like never before...they will have no use for the working class. It will cease to exist over time if we keep the current education system and capitalism.


----------



## Stelmaria

Just_Some_Guy said:


> I think this is the heart of the matter; how will we distribute resources if 40% have no employment?



Well without some sort of revolutionary solution, I dare say the best we have is a social welfare scheme, like Friedman's negative income tax.


----------



## SirDave

Snow Leopard said:


> Well without some sort of revolutionary solution, I dare say the best we have is a social welfare scheme, like Friedman's negative income tax.


Absolutely right on this! And it has the added benefit to incentivize people to get into the economic system, get a job - instead of working under the table - and report their income and pay taxes.

This means that the Social Security and Medicare systems are supported by a greater percentage of those who will eventually need their benefits and their benefits (in SS) will be greater when they do retire, or worse case become disabled.

Also - another added benefit - this tax policy gets people off of welfare and makes the minimum wage moot. It stimulates the economy and doesn't deter those entering the workforce for the first time - recent high school grads or even school quitters - from getting that first job and developing good work habits and responsibility.

I use the present verb tense because the EITC (earned income tax credit) already exists, but isn't fully enough applied, as in a substitute for the minimum wage which (minimum wage) is repressive to those not already employed.


----------



## Stelmaria

The part we should become most frightened with is the mechanisation of the military and the police force. *cue robocop*


----------



## PowerShell

But won't the cost to produce things go substantially down and ultimately that will be passed onto consumers?


----------



## Stelmaria

PowerShell said:


> But won't the cost to produce things go substantially down and ultimately that will be passed onto consumers?


That's all fine, but it assumes you have a job to be able to buy stuff in the first place.


----------



## Coburn

HFGE said:


> Technology destroys some industries and creates others. Despite what some alarmist economists like to declare, that still hasn't changed.


The problem trend is that more and more of the new jobs require a much higher level of education/understanding of science/mathematics.

So many new industries are created. Unfortunately, many people are not trained to keep up with the new level of knowledge required to work in it.


----------



## PowerShell

Dumaresq said:


> The problem trend is that more and more of the new jobs require a much higher level of education/understanding of science/mathematics.
> 
> So many new industries are created. Unfortunately, many people are not trained to keep up with the new level of knowledge required to work in it.


I wonder how many people actually have the IQ to be able to do some of these things. I have a feeling a good chunk of people that will be out of work are the bottom of the barrel type people I bang my head trying to help when they call the help desk. I mean some of these people don't really just fail at computer, they fail at basic life concepts. If you get a new printer to replace an old printer and it doesn't plug in, move to where the old printer was. The cord should reach. Don't just randomly put it anywhere and then complain the cord won't reach. Basic life concept: Do you buy a lamp, put it where you think it would be best, and then sit in the dark because you fail to plug it in because it's not close enough to the wall?


----------



## Coburn

PowerShell said:


> I wonder how many people actually have the IQ to be able to do some of these things. I have a feeling a good chunk of people that will be out of work are the bottom of the barrel type people I bang my head trying to help when they call the help desk. I mean some of these people don't really just fail at computer, they fail at basic life concepts. If you get a new printer to replace an old printer and it doesn't plug in, move to where the old printer was. The cord should reach. Don't just randomly put it anywhere and then complain the cord won't reach. Basic life concept: Do you buy a lamp, put it where you think it would be best, and then sit in the dark because you fail to plug it in because it's not close enough to the wall?


I think there is definitely that group.

But the other group I think are older people. People who grew up in the company man era and are now unemployed post 2008 layoffs and are competing for jobs that demand an ability to not only understand new technology, but keep up with the constant changes in tech. 

It's not that their IQ is lower...it's just an unfamiliar job market, and it can be difficult to suddenly be out of a job and having to play 10 years of tech catch up to compete with new college grads.


----------



## Genius

@Just_Some_Guy

Wow, this video is surely enlighting! I just recently came across a similar topic and it started me thinking: yes, this is something that's going on already and we WILL be around to see our jobs slowly dying away. We have survived many of economical revolutions, but I think there's something more to this this time. I actually believe that this is just the next step in our evolution. Which sounds even more depressing to me.

Someone in this thread also mentioned global elite and that's another question that sort of worries me and I haven't come across that anywhere on the internet. IF mind upload becomes our reality, what will then happen when those rich enough have an idea to upload themselves multiple times? It's not a new idea and it's not something to dismiss.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana

The Wanderering ______ said:


> In a fucked up kind of way. I really want robots to take over all human jobs just so american civilians will all lose their jobs and the very large lower class will get pissed off at the wealthy and start revolting for resources. Or Y'know they could focus on maintaining the day to day and steal and kill for food, I prefer the former option though.


lmao! you're such a cp6 :laughing: 

problem with that is this large lower class would have even _less_ power than it already does because the robots who have taken their jobs have taken with them the last remaining leverage available to the lower class: labor strikes

...which I'm happy to say, because that revolt would accomplish nothing but a circle jerk of feel-goody adolescent rebellion


----------



## The Wanderering ______

Swordsman of Mana said:


> lmao! you're such a cp6 :laughing:
> 
> problem with that is this large lower class would have even _less_ power than it already does because the robots who have taken their jobs have taken with them the last remaining leverage available to the lower class: labor strikes
> 
> ...which I'm happy to say, because that revolt would accomplish nothing but a circle jerk of feel-goody adolescent rebellion


We can all feel good and smoke marijuana after the rebellion. Shiiiiiiiiiiiit with all the robots taking our jobs, we can smoke marijuana all fucking day. 

Or you know we could all go home...


----------



## RobynC

@_Swordsman of Mana_



> problem with that is this large lower class would have even _less_ power than it already does


You're right and that's bad.


@_Genius_



> I just recently came across a similar topic and it started me thinking: yes, this is something that's going on already and we WILL be around to see our jobs slowly dying away.


I'm surprised so few are worried about the effects that this will have on our economy and on us. Nobody ever seems to talk about this without fear of being labeled some technophobe.

I'd also like to point out that when it comes to regulating technology, while everybody always gets squeamish when it comes up, we do it all the time

Anything that involves engineering or scientific principles to accomplish a task is technology, that being said


Houses are built to fire-codes: This is a restriction on the way they are built
There are restrictions as to what chemicals are used in paint and insulation
Cars have to be built to various specifications in terms of crash-safety, they have to have seat-belts in them
There are also legal restrictions in how fast you can drive a car, even though one could physically drive it well beyond
And nobody says "You can't stop progress" with that. They might not agree with the regulations, they might not feel they're tough enough! But nobody complains about "stopping progress".

I'd also like to point out something else: Progress isn't always good. It basically means "advancing as towards a goal". The goal is not necessarily specified so it could be anything from bettering human life, to making money, to genocide.

Almost any genocidal group has viewed it as a step in the right direction or progress when a member of a certain culture, religion, or ethnic group was killed. It didn't necessarily make it good -- it merely meant that they advanced towards their goal.


----------

