Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Will You Lose Your Job to a Robot? Silicon Valley Is Split

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 78 posts

Re: Will You Lose Your Job to a Robot? Silicon Valley Is Split

#51

Post by tawan »

I see a darker future ahead: From a totally cynical but rational and economic perspective I think human labour is cheaper than any machine workforce for many tasks. We reproduce and maintain ourselves, we just need some water and food. We are very flexible and can adapt to any task very quickly. No need to order spare parts made from expensive raw materials. Human labour is only expensive because we have civil rights and we tend to riot if we are treated badly. Take away these two factors and you have a cheap labour army that's getting bigger by itself.

We are also limited by the capacity and architecture of our brains. A.I can rely on Moore's law, or quantum computers to benefit steadily from better hardware. Therefore I conclude that the most successful agents in our economy will be of A.I. The enterprises behind them might still have a human executer, smiling all charmingly, but A.I. will be in control.

Re: Will You Lose Your Job to a Robot? Silicon Valley Is Split

#52

Post by zo1 »

cousin_it wrote: post #38
true_religion wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing that manual labor will be a thing of the past, and I struggle to see how this is a bad thing overall. If the same work is being done without human intervention, why not just give people who're unemployed the products of that labour?

Because the entities that control the machines and give their products away will be outcompeted by entities that keep the products to fuel their own growth. Over time, the former kind of entities will die out. This is a general argument, the "entities" could be rich people, companies, governments, AIs, etc.

Some of those general "entities" you speak of are composed of smaller entities. Trade (e.g. of labor) will occur between those smaller entities.

Where there exists scarcity and a differential in value, trade will occur. Now, of course, that says nothing about the people that have nothing of value to trade with. But I'd argue that everyone has something to trade, it just might be of very low relative value. Even in such a scenario they'll trade with their peers.

No matter what scenario of this dystopian future I play out in my head, I always find equilibrium. The key is not to attempt to fix it, but to have base rules that apply to all and will mean basic safety for all. You can't guarantee a peachy life for everyone. Most people just want to play meddling Deity with government money and violence, to suit their own personal ideals and prejudices. That is why I'm an anarcho-capitalist; because it makes everyone absolutely equal and everyone absolutely free to make their own way in life without intervention.

Re: Will You Lose Your Job to a Robot? Silicon Valley Is Split

#53

Post by seren »

throwaway9812 wrote: post #46
superuser2 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In 200 years, people will only have hobby because that will be all they have to do and most of their needs have been automated. How will their living expenses be paid, then?

Are you serious? People work currently, because that's the way _society_ works, currently. We have convinced ourselves that everyone either works or reaps the benefits of having worked (which is why he "justly" owns the means of production). However, your question is meaningless _if_ everything is produced by robots. Nobody will be able to charge for anything, because the justification for the current way wealth is d…

Until now revolution have pitched humans against other humans. And in most successful revolution, at one point, the police/army refuses to shoot on the protestors anymore. (or oust themselves the current head of state)

I don't necessary have a really bleak view of the future, but I wonder what would a revolution would looked like with a robotized police. You could hope that at one point someone on the loyalist side would press the robot kill switch.

But taking today's world as an example, I wonder what would Assad or Gaddafi would have done with an army of robots.

Re: Will You Lose Your Job to a Robot? Silicon Valley Is Split

#54

Post by owenmarshall »

krapp wrote: post #32
owenmarshall wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure a capitalist system makes sense in a techno-utopia. If the robots make themselves, mine the minerals, smelt the ores, assemble the smartphones, and deliver them to me, there is not a labor cost associated with assembling the smartphone, so why should there be a price? Maybe the "cost" comes from the loss of the mineral in the ground, but if we're going full on techno-utopia the robots would reclaim the m…

Companies don't automate to reduce potential profits, though, but to reduce the cost and inefficiency of human labor. Presumably, even with a fully automated infrastructure, there would still be a human-run corporation at the top, otherwise why would they bother creating the system at all? But then I may simply not have gone far enough down the rabbithole in my conception of 'techno-utopia.' If the automation is trul…

> Presumably, even with a fully automated infrastructure, there would still be a human-run corporation at the top, otherwise why would they bother creating the system at all?

IMO you're looking at the system before it reaches an endgame.

Investing in automation is a rational decision to reduce costs & increase profits, so companies are going to make that choice. As automations continue to improve more and more jobs will be eliminated in order to continue increasing profits.

But as jobs are eliminated the people that used to do the jobs are still there - still wanting to earn money to feed and clothe their families. And as they don't have jobs, they don't have money, so corporate profits begin to suffer.

The system will eventually reach a tipping point. I just hope we end on the side of "we run the machines and distribute their output for the good of the people" rather than "we run the machines, keep their output, and give the people worthless scrip".

>If the automation is truly self-sustaining and self-contained, in essence, a complete AI economy in and of itself, then perhaps the "cost" comes in the burden of including humans at all?

Hopefully our robot overlords would see it as an opportunity, rather than a cost.

Re: Will You Lose Your Job to a Robot? Silicon Valley Is Split

#55

Post by zo1 »

owenmarshall wrote: post #5

Once again sethf hits the nail on the head. The response is entirely up to us. I'm not personally optimistic: this country has a deeply held Puritanical work ethic, and even if we get past that we have a real nasty habit of not liking to give any government benefits to " those people ". But if we can get past that...

We're not going to get past that because not everyone agrees with you.

At least, not until you realize that forcing people to do what you believe is right is fundamentally immoral. No matter how noble your ideals, and how rainbow-colored your utopian future is "if we can get past that".

It's sad that you can both simultaneously hold noble ideals of taking care of the needy, while thinking that the only way to do it is by violently and immorally forcing others to help you do it, whether they want to or not.

Re: Will You Lose Your Job to a Robot? Silicon Valley Is Split

#56

Post by sanxiyn »

tawan wrote: post #51

I see a darker future ahead: From a totally cynical but rational and economic perspective I think human labour is cheaper than any machine workforce for many tasks. We reproduce and maintain ourselves, we just need some water and food. We are very flexible and can adapt to any task very quickly. No need to order spare parts made from expensive raw materials. Human labour is only expensive because we have civil rights…

I agree that under the current system, AI will be in control, and that would be bad for humanity. It seems to me the obvious conclusion is that we should change the system. AI is not yet in control, we are. Therefore, while we are still in control, we should steer the future in a way that is beneficial to us.

You seem to think that we would fail to coordinate to do so until it is too late. That is possible, but I don't think that is certain yet.

Re: Will You Lose Your Job to a Robot? Silicon Valley Is Split

#57

Post by owenmarshall »

schrodinger wrote: post #49
owenmarshall wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure a capitalist system makes sense in a techno-utopia. If the robots make themselves, mine the minerals, smelt the ores, assemble the smartphones, and deliver them to me, there is not a labor cost associated with assembling the smartphone, so why should there be a price? Maybe the "cost" comes from the loss of the mineral in the ground, but if we're going full on techno-utopia the robots would reclaim the m…

I think that art would remain the thing that humans alone can produce - good tasting food (the production can be automated, but not generating a recipe) - music - entertainment... In my theoretical future, capitalism will still exist, and we'll still trade and buy things from one another, we just won't need to do so for our basic needs, only for our entertainment desires...

http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html -- Bertrand Russell agrees with you.

I think (and hope) this is where we'd end up.

Re: Will You Lose Your Job to a Robot? Silicon Valley Is Split

#58

Post by JoeAltmaier »

tawan wrote: post #51

I see a darker future ahead: From a totally cynical but rational and economic perspective I think human labour is cheaper than any machine workforce for many tasks. We reproduce and maintain ourselves, we just need some water and food. We are very flexible and can adapt to any task very quickly. No need to order spare parts made from expensive raw materials. Human labour is only expensive because we have civil rights…

But robots adapt (or their manufacturers do). Need a drill attachment for construction? Just snap it on. NO need to use a human who needs a portable drill with internal motor and cord.

Re: Will You Lose Your Job to a Robot? Silicon Valley Is Split

#59

Post by bduerst »

The BLS has this documented fairly well over the past century: http://i.imgur.com/BPNyjM8.png

As advances in agricultural automation removed laborer jobs in the 1900s, workers switched to different, more-specialized industries.

In short, we will probably see jobs disappearing because of automation in the 2000s, but it won't necessarily be bad. Most likely we will also be seeing many new types of jobs appearing as well - some which may have never been conceived yet.

Re: Will You Lose Your Job to a Robot? Silicon Valley Is Split

#60

Post by Balgair »

Often, the artist or novelist is a better judge of history than the professor or engineer, as they have the distance to see.

Neil Stephenson's 'Snow Crash' is a masterpiece of scene and action. His 'dystopian' novel set a bar to which we judge ourselves to this day. I use 'dystopian' in quotes as Stephenson himself describes his novel as an optimistic view of the future when he wrote it. Why? Because humanity survives the Cold War.

In 1980, that was not necessarily true. I would like to remind any readers that the facts have not changed in this manner. War has always been with us, and the robots, though shiny, will be tools of war just as every keyboard, scythe, and lump of granite has been. If there is one thing we can count on, it is war.

You may argue that the robot will eliminate the scarcity of resources that causes conflict. I hope so. However, history shows us again and again that war is a part of man. If you eliminate it, you rid us all of a part of humanity. I hope dearly for this.

But the consequences of that are not simple, there will be blowback to having the robot take our darker sides away. It is a bargain I hope we strike with the robot. But I have no doubt that my grandchildren will not be the same humans we are if that deal is signed.

Post reply on HN