Technological Unemployment: Much More Than You Wanted to Know
slatestarcodex.com
Technological Unemployment: Much More Than You Wanted to Know
1–10 of 233 posts
Re: Technological Unemployment: Much More Than You Wanted to Know
#2The difference I see is that historically automation was used to increase productivity. I don't see that in the current wave of "AI"-based automation. There's an emphasis on speed, accuracy, and working with more unknowns, but there isn't any talk of getting more work done. That makes it scary.
Re: Technological Unemployment: Much More Than You Wanted to Know
#3>The report linked above is from Ball State University, and argues that, while manufacturing has thrived, automation has reduced the need for workers so much that lots of them have been laid off:
>Had we kept 2000-levels of productivity and applied them to 2010-levels of production, we would have required 20.9 million manufacturing workers. Instead, we employed only 12.1 million.
>The report gets summarized in a few places as “13% of job loss is due to trade, 87% is due to increasing productivity/automation”, which seems like a fair summary of some of its claims.
It's a fair summary of Michael J. Hicks and Srikant Devara's claims, but if you take a closer look at the study's model, they conflate cost savings from offshoring with cost savings from automation, which would naturally make job losses from automation seem relatively larger.
They also lobby for a reduction in corporation tax on page 7.
Re: Technological Unemployment: Much More Than You Wanted to Know
#4The difference I see is that historically automation was used to increase productivity. I don't see that in the current wave of "AI"-based automation. There's an emphasis on speed, accuracy, and working with more unknowns, but there isn't any talk of getting more work done. That makes it scary.
I'm not sure what you mean.
"Speed" is almost directly exactly analogous to "increased productivity" isn't it?
Also accuracy - reducing scrap means more can be produced with less materials in less time.
"working with more unknowns" - doing things that couldn't be done before.
These all seem to be kinds of "getting more work done".
Re: Technological Unemployment: Much More Than You Wanted to Know
#5It feels like we're moving away from jobs that are purely productive, to jobs that are more creative. I don't mean arts etc, but 50 years ago a company like Facebook/Snap/Gaming/Any digital entertainment really, could not exist because people were occupied work that was required for society to function. Now humans can start focusing on spending their day building things for the entertainment of other humans, and also choosing careers based on what they feel is fun/satisfying for themselves.
Re: Technological Unemployment: Much More Than You Wanted to Know
#6The difference I see is that historically automation was used to increase productivity. I don't see that in the current wave of "AI"-based automation. There's an emphasis on speed, accuracy, and working with more unknowns, but there isn't any talk of getting more work done. That makes it scary.
>The difference I see is that historically automation was used to increase productivity.
Is this true? The stocking frame (and the reactionary group of Luddites that it incited) didn't really increase productivity. It just did work humans were doing for less money than a human salary.
I guess I also just don't see much difference. All that will happen will be again a shift away from many kinds of jobs (the easily automatible ones) to different kinds.
I mean, there are all kinds of jobs now that didn't exist 50 years ago (software engineer, social media manager, influencer, etc. etc.)
Re: Technological Unemployment: Much More Than You Wanted to Know
#7It feels like we're moving away from jobs that are purely productive, to jobs that are more creative. I don't mean arts etc, but 50 years ago a company like Facebook/Snap/Gaming/Any digital entertainment really, could not exist because people were occupied work that was required for society to function. Now humans can start focusing on spending their day building things for the entertainment of other humans, and also…
Maybe. On the downside; maybe those jobs won't be available to everyone because there is a skills gap or there aren't enough of them.
If there are people who are left behind; what do we do about it?
Re: Technological Unemployment: Much More Than You Wanted to Know
#8It feels like we're moving away from jobs that are purely productive, to jobs that are more creative. I don't mean arts etc, but 50 years ago a company like Facebook/Snap/Gaming/Any digital entertainment really, could not exist because people were occupied work that was required for society to function. Now humans can start focusing on spending their day building things for the entertainment of other humans, and also…
>also choosing careers based on what they feel is fun/satisfying for themselves.
I don't think this is ever going to change in human society. If a job is fun to a large group of people, then it will pay poorly because many people will want to do it. And poor pay decreases the satisfaction one gets from such a job.
The only people who win here are those who find a job fun / satisfying that most other people cannot handle.
There's a reason professions like doctory, investment banking, and consulting pay so much, they involve lots of sacrifice and/or job unhappiness that you have to pay people a lot to get them to commit to the job.
Re: Technological Unemployment: Much More Than You Wanted to Know
#9The difference I see is that historically automation was used to increase productivity. I don't see that in the current wave of "AI"-based automation. There's an emphasis on speed, accuracy, and working with more unknowns, but there isn't any talk of getting more work done. That makes it scary.
>The difference I see is that historically automation was used to increase productivity. Is this true? The stocking frame (and the reactionary group of Luddites that it incited) didn't really increase productivity. It just did work humans were doing for less money than a human salary. I guess I also just don't see much difference. All that will happen will be again a shift away from many kinds of jobs (the easily aut…
Yes, all kinds of jobs - but are there actually a substantial number of people doing those jobs compared to the number of jobs that are easy to automate away?
Re: Technological Unemployment: Much More Than You Wanted to Know
#10It feels like we're moving away from jobs that are purely productive, to jobs that are more creative. I don't mean arts etc, but 50 years ago a company like Facebook/Snap/Gaming/Any digital entertainment really, could not exist because people were occupied work that was required for society to function. Now humans can start focusing on spending their day building things for the entertainment of other humans, and also…
Maybe. On the downside; maybe those jobs won't be available to everyone because there is a skills gap or there aren't enough of them. If there are people who are left behind; what do we do about it?
As long as it isn't profitable to help the people left behind there won't be much done. Hopefully the people left behind will start making it unprofitable for the elites to ignore them. Probably won't happen though due to the vast amount of surveillance we're subjected to along with possible robotic police force in the future.