[OT] On Robots and Redistribution

Nah. Robots will be able to clean bedpans before they can replace financial analysts! Seriously, displacement of human workers has been a concern with every leap forward in manufacturing technology. The production line was more efficient and required fewer workers; the net effect was that more, less expensive cars were built which increased the number of assemblers required plus added new jobs in machine design, production and maintenance. The jobs will be different, but there won't be fewer of them.

A robot giving a lap dance won't lie to you, but every other aspect of it is inferior to human practioners

Let's just hope any lap-dancing robot will a) look like Trisha Helfer or Grace Park and b) won't violate any of Asimov's Three Laws. Maybe bend them a little but not break them.

"Render financial analysts obsolete"!!!!! OMG...that's impossible. Everything you buy needs a seller, and everything you sell needs a buyer. The only way you get price discovery is to do the trading, and the impact of the fundamentals on that process are impossible to predict no matter HOW sophisticated your technical analysis may be.

Would a club allow extras from a robot stripper? I mean, really, not a person so I guess that there wouldn't be any laws against it or anything. Just a hypothetical question.

I read an article that hypothesized that eventually the only human jobs remaining is going to be creative ones.

It will take awhile but eventually society will have to redefine what a "job" is.

But RickyBoy said CFAs were absolute top of the food chain and mocked me when I begged to differ!

I don't know rockstar666! No reason somebody couldn't design a brilliant algorithm that buyers and sellers authorize up to specific amounts! Just consider high frequency trading! The future is now!

The Wolf of Wall Street cleaning bedpans! Brilliant!

And the bedpan cleaning algorithm may be surprisingly difficult! I hear that you have to remember to wipe!

4got2wipe: I have a series 3 trading license so I do have some knowledge of trading theory.

Every dollar made means someone lost a dollar. If there was a foolproof algorithm, the markets would never trade! You'd have no buyers and no sellers because no one could get the price the algorithm demanded. You need 'speculators' who are willing to take risks. With risk comes profits and losses. No risk to the whole market is impossible.

Financial analysts are parasites. What they do should be eliminated.

But as far as jobs for people who want to do real work, consider Buckminster Fuller.

Writing from the 1930's into the 1970's he maintained that both Capitalism and Communism are based on outdated economic premises, that of scarcity. We have made vast technological advances, though mostly driven by the desire to kill each other. The result of this though is that we now have the ability to take care of every single person better than kings and queens have lived before.

Problem is we don't want to accept this. We still expect people to prove that they are able to "Earn a Living". Well, no one earns a living, there is no such thing and there hasn't been for over a hundred years. Its just that lots of people have figured out a way of getting a cut of the cash flow. ( Some of these people hang up Financial Analyst shingles. )

And besides, most paid employment does absolutely nothing of social good whatsoever. Very few people with paying jobs do anything which is really worth the gasoline they burn up in their cars driving to work.

Automation should not be seen as an evil. But our economic system is just wrong, totally wrong, and so we need to change it. Everyone must be dealt in, not only people who are willing to accept the insanity.

SJG

Stones, 1998, Poland youtube.com

PG,

Grace park good! I've had some lap dances that were VERY robotic. Sad, but a number of dancers are that way. Almost as though they are scripted.

I still say that programming a computer to make better trades than a human will be easier than programming a robot to clean bedpans effectively!

For trading you just write some brilliant Bayesian voodoo and introduce a little randomness! Maybe you get random numbers by imaging a bank of lava lamps! That would be brilliant!

For bedpans the robot has to move enough like a human to be a good bedpan wiper! Way harder than the financial stuff!

^^^ actually the bed pan could be handle with laser precision, springs, mop heads, aND some lavender oil

"Would a club allow extras from a robot stripper?"

Have you ever watched the episode of "The Big Bang Theory" with Howard's Robot Hand?

No way do I want a robot extra. :)

But all Howard's robot hand needed was a reboot! Brilliant!

Actually I have a little knowledge of the subject and most HFTs ended up send their firms bankrupt. They don't have much money relative to the big players so are very easy to push around. They are now no longer all the rage and human traders are prefered. Will they make a comeback someday? Could be, but there is more to it than having a good algorithm.

Actually, 4got, the technology to clean bedpans effectively is already out there - I give to the Navy's X47 autonomous drone, which is able to take off, fly a mission, and land on the deck of an aircraft carrier without human intervention! It is truly amazing, and that technology would be totally be adaptable to recognizing a bed pan in any orientation, grasp it, pick it up, and insert it into a cleaning station. What it doesn't have is imagination and the ability to spot and act on future trends. The computing power and algorithms will be an effective tool in the hands of a competent operator, just like CADD programs are for engineers, it will just allow poor fund managers to make bad decisions more quickly.

It's exactly the problem Marx predicted for private enterprise capitalism as productivity reached very high levels. Unfortunately, his alternative, the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, is a non-starter.

Reducing the typical work week, with a much higher minimum wage, seems like the only play we've got.

Kind of crazy idea, courtesy of the Animatrix series: What if we got to the point where robots could do all the "work" and us humans were just free to enjoy ourselves? Are we slowly moving towards that point? How would we evaluate "worth" then?

(Of course, in the Animatrix/Matrix, the robots start becoming sentient, having feelings and wanting freedom of their own, which the humans deny them, leading to the Robot Wars and, well, The Matrix. So yeah, we'd have to make sure AI is limited in that regard.)

Would/could the world become, essentially, basically a lifelong retirement community? All the food we need, prepared just as we like it whenever we want by 3D food printers and served by robots (or, if we want to make it ourselves as a hobby, the ingredients 3D printed for, chemically created for or somehow teleported to us, right in our house)? No need to drive anywhere with autonomous cars? Golf whenever we want, with courses cared for by robots? All we'd need to do is socialize and entertain each other?

Thing is, there's always going to be people who, in some way, shape or form, are going to want to somehow show they're "better" than others. So I don't think currency will totally go away. But what if we could also bring up the minimum standard of living for everyone so no one has to endure what we currently consider to be poverty? Would folks even want that? I honestly think there are some that wouldn't.

Bank tellers/ATMs--Telephone operators/direct dialing--Lawyers/LegalZoom software--C.P.A.s/tax software--Phonograph records/mp3--Bookstores/Kindle--Retail store clerks/online shopping--Daily newspapers/digital delivery--Combat pilots/drones--Pay phones/cell phones--Opinion magazines and newsletters/blogs--USPS/email--Travel agents/tickets online--Chauffers/electric self driven cars--City maps/dashboard GPS--Checks/electronic payments--Books/audio books--Film cameras/digital cameras--Contact lenses/lasik eye surgery--Pharmacies/online meds--Clergy/self-help gurus--Movie theaters/cable tv--VCR/DVD--

Sex/???

If I worked in finance I'd be very nervous about automation. any industry whose main product is facilitating transactions is vulnerable to automation. There's a lot of fat in that industry waiting to be trimmed.

JamesSD: "If I worked in finance I'd be very nervous about automation."

I work in finance and it don't worry my ass none!

Automation should be our friend, not our enemy. And the same goes for the last 60 years of agricultural advances and of materials science advances. They all enable us to do more with less, and this should be good.

It is our system, expecting people to prove that they can "earn a living" which is wrong.

The first one of these world wide industrial recessions occurred in 1873. It happened because the productive capacity of the steel industry, largely based in England, exceeded the ability to consume. Nothing about this has changed since, the problem has exacerbated. But it would not be a problem if the rules of our economic system could be changed. In recognition of this, the theme of Upton Sinclair's 1934 campaign to become California's Governor was "Production for Use".

What happened directly out of 1873 was a further concentration of production ownership. Then we also ended Reconstruction, the federal occupation in the South. And so soon the South was threatening to secede again, and dealing with racial supremacy was pushed out for almost 100 years.

They wanted the West to be a natural resource base and the South to be a kind of internal third world, a consumer base.

Capitalism works this way, never solving the problems it creates, just looking to expand the pie. And indeed, this is how it has gone. Two world wars to soak up excess production and now a world wide neoliberal agenda, and then here at home the futures of an entire generation trashed in the neoliberal policies which @Dougster makes money off of. And we are still using military adventurism to lighten our unemployment problem and as an economic stimulus.

We need to change our system, not fight against automation and new technologies. Capitalism is madness. But Marx is also horribly out of date. There have been lots of newer thinkers since, like Buckminster Fuller, like Jean Baudrillard, like Deleuze and Guattari, and now Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri.

SJG

yeah man like everything should be free and like no one should ever win or work hard. Competition like isn't good man.

Either capitalism or communism could work wonderfully if people and their motivations were perfect. Of course, none of us are perfect.

Given that, capitalism is bound to work better than communism simply because that system allows avarice freer reign and so there will be basic prosperity, although badly out of balance and vulnerable to "corrections" when boundaries are pushed too far. Communism, on the other hand, is totally out of synch with human nature. If fact, there has never been a society that has actually been communist - perks and power become the real currency.

They would both suck without them tempering each other. Mixed economies are best.

Definitely a pure "communist" society would be much better than a pure capitalist one. Nobody hear even knows the definition of the word though (bunch of mindless cock-sucking circle-jerkers that they are they thinks it the same thing as Bolshevism because the media said so) so I don't expect them to be able to figure out why.

I read today there was a shortage of robot programmers. Now if Apple could invent ntelligent inexpensive manufacturing robots where it would be easy for anyone to program the robot, costs might go down. problem, manufacturers always seem to always want unique programs for their products.

I think SJG overestimates where we currently, but I agree that as time marches along it become less and less necessary for "everyone" to be working. This is why, although everyone screams about dropping labor force participation it is actually a good sign.

I think the advances in AI, robotics, and medicine are so rapid now that almost nobody will need to work by the end of our lifetimes. Robots will simply be better at think abound everything than people. No some liberal arts faggots like jestie214 might say "yes, but will they be able to write poetry?" Honestly, who gives a fuck? Probably yeah, probably, got to think it will the lowest priority for them though.

So, yes, of course wealth redistribution become more and more necessary over time. It will probably starts with things like paying people to go to school even if it is for faggity subjects like art history to give the illusion it's something other than a wealth transfer. Then there will be basic incomes, starting with the argument that it is cheaper than the welfare state complex. As time goes on "wealth transfer" will become less and less of a dirty phrase.

Most importantly will be subsidized medicine. This will be the most challenging one of all to deal with. As medicines come out that great enhance lifespan but are super expensive what gets access to them first? Hopefully we get to sidestep the issue, but what if we don't? I can see that as being the major political the country has ever faced. Hard to see either side relenting. The 1% wanting to maintain the status quo so they can get the longevity drugs first, but the 99% (maybe) realizing why the hell should they support a system in which they don't even get to live as long as everyone else?

I think things work out, because their is a greater desire for "fairness" in people than the cynics believe. Especially when economic improvements make it possible in the first place. My beliefs are - a mixed economy with capitalist and socialist elements makes this happen the most quickly, so is thus ideal. My other belief - better take out some insurance in case things don't go smoothly.

Start making money now, learn the skills of investment (i.e. think for yourself and stop listening to the financial media). Choose the fields which are likely to be automated last, but even then you want to get to the point where most of your income is coming from investments. Staying high in terms of wealth and income and income position relative to the rest of the population is important, because you want to be one of the last to get shut out. Hopefully if you play it that way you stay "above the cut" while the wealth redistribution battle play out. Then one days, it's AI that is inventing everything, and bringing the cost of everything down such that it is a no brainer that everyone can be provided for right now. Until the last thing you want is to be without alot of money you can use to invest. I think even those people will be able to pull through, but it's very risky if things don't work out okay, so although you may never need the defense - would rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

And then there are those of us committed to fighting it out, to make sure that Dougster's New World Order never does come to pass.

Less and less people in the labor force is certainly true, as is the need for wealth transfer. And it is always good if we can pay more people to stay in school longer.

But what we cannot do, what our democracy cannot survive, is this idea that while some people like @Dougster are the masters of the universe, the rest of us are just objects of welfare. No, we must setup a participatory society and make sure that @Dougster's vision is thwarted because everyone has something meaningful to contribute.

SJG

@SJG: I think our visions our the same. I say above, I think it is most likely that we do get the fairy tale ending.

There are couple of difference between us, however. The first is that you want to work to make the fairy tale ending happen, while I want to want work on insuring myself in case it does not. The masses are so subject to media thought control I can see them going either way. Especially when the stakes will be as high as they are. I give Utopia about a 2/3 chance.

The other difference between you and me is that you think people care about politics. I believe they do not. Especially not when it comes to more than just talk and their is a price to be paid. There might be a handful of true idealists who are also competent enough to make things happen, but I believe, for the most a person's statement of their political beliefs is just a fashion statement - trying to fit into a clique. Will that change in the future as the stakes get higher? Maybe, but I'll wait for some concrete evidence before I believe.

Third difference, I believe increasing the general wealth is the best means to get to the Utopia versus a bunch of unnecessary political reforms. We are pretty close to optimal in the US as it stands, so if it ain't broke...

I wonder how hard it would be to program a computer to troll websites! I'm going to rank difficulty of programming tasks as:

Trolling rickdugan (and being funny about it) > Robot stripper > Bedpan cleaner > Financial analyst

The idea of utopia is a marketing ploy by would be tyrants the same as peace is for pot bellied generals and the misery merchants peddling faux humanitarianism from their Geneva bordellos.

War is and forever will be the natural state for mankind. It is neither 'good' nor 'bad' as these concepts are merely excuses used by men who don’t want to admit that war is what humans live for, what humans love and what humans exist for. That which can kill you is what makes you feel alive and no amount of feminizing, socializing and civilizing the species is going to alter that fact.

Ever since Cain killed Abel men have been trying to beat the living fuck out of each other. Whether it is two men using hands, knees and teeth or twenty men with clubs and stones, or two hundred with machetes or two thousand with bayonets and high-powered automatic weapons, man has and will always try to kill his rivals and take their shite along with their women. These are the men who don’t try to suppress their nature. These are the men who understand truth. Who understand that justice is determined and history written by the victor.

When the West falls, and it will fall as sure as night follows day, these are also the men that will still be standing. Barristers, schoolmasters and dullards of all sorts will be summarily eviscerated. Today’s effeminate ruling puppet masters will be dragged into the light and thrown onto the pyres. Warrior kings will arise once again adorned with battle scars and covered in the blood of the slaughtered. They will be immortalized in the lamentations of their vanquished foes. And these are the men who will define and create the only version of utopia humans will ever know short lived as it will necessarily be.

Without the all powerful Big Brother state to provide sustenance and protection, so called feminists will immediately and forever cease to exist. The little women will all try to latch onto the last available alphas for protection. Those that fail to find an alpha male will fall prey to the feral bands of beta males or will be beaten and stoned to death by the bearded boy fuckers or will be eaten by the godless communist cannibals.

Hey, I don’t feel sorry for the women, fuck them. Yes they got a raw deal being born on the losing end of the gender lottery but tough shite. They can try all they want to fight and win, evolve and adapt but in the end they will all have to depend on men, as they always have or they will perish.

Real men live for war and we are now in a war for survival of the species. The uncaring universe is amoral and therefore completely void of a vested outcome one way or the other. History is nothing but a lie and today is merely tomorrow’s history. Human beings as a species are vile, sick fucks.

I came into the world screaming and covered in blood and gore, I intend on leaving the same way. To my dying breath I will continue to bring wrath and righteous justice to the wicked be they everyday Muslim cutthroats or the worst of the worst, that pestilence most foul, evil incarnate, Fabian Socialists. Fuck them all.

pikey_bastard did you do some bad drugs last night? It sort of sounds like you have a Mad Max movie playing in your head! That is not a brilliant way to live!

My advice to you is to write "brilliant!" as often as possible in your posts! I never used to use the word, but I started and realized that saying "brilliant" made you FEEL brilliant!

And calling things you don't like "not brilliant" makes you feel much better about the world than saying things you don't like are a "pestilence most foul"!

And, perhaps I'm missing something as a non-Brit, it just doesn't strike me that a Labour think thank should rank below Islamic terrorists! Even I put the Islamic terrorists in the "definitely not brilliant" category and I'm pretty happy go luck because I say "brilliant!" so often!

I have no opinion on the Fabian society! Well, other than thinking it's kind of brilliant that they have the same name as the '50s singer!

^^^^^^

Piss off ya reffo wank stain. Twenty-nine women in forty-two days of scrogging living on nothing but beer and lumpia says that I’m not old. I’ll still be slotting bush pigs for fun long after you’re in the ground.

youtube.com

Cheers to your mum.

Brilliant! pikey_bastard vs Che!