I already asked this in /biz/ but you guys can probably be more

>>1081955
>Is X going to be replaced by robot soon, should I learn X?

No, do whatever the fuck you want, everything will be replaced by robot soon

>>1081955
Long haul automaton is already being tested, and I bet be in place in a decade. There will probably be new jobs created though to get it from a central depot to the customer, as their sites may be construction with "roads" or just shitty back alleys.
>But I'm not an expert or even a trucker.

>>1081955
When automation comes closer to being a threat. Unions will start creating laws preventing companys from going full automation.

For example truck driving is big in the US because we don't have rail systems like the EU. Id say you would see automation come into the EU 10 years before the US would consider it.

>>1081955
just do it, learn how automation is done and how to apply it while trucking and jump sideways to a new career in a few years

>>1081965
The question is relevant, as far as I know the technology doesn't exist to replace electricians, hvac technicians, plumbers, etc.. but driverless vehicles already exist, it's just a matter of getting the legislation in place (but that certainly doesn't mean it's going to happen overnight).

>>1081966

Militaries and even some companies are already using the technology, like I said it's more about passing legislation at this point. Obviously other jobs will be created, I don't think vehicles will be completely unmanned anytime soon, but earning potential will likely drop if the "driver's" only job is to sit in the cab making sure the computer doesn't fuck up.

It won't happen in our lifetime op. Every truck will be automatic in less than 10 years which takes the fun out of it for me.

Don't sign up with swift or cr england. Schneider is decent from what I've heard for free schooling.

>>1081981
You sure about that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o43nqvq4BOA

Get out before you start OP

>>1081955
>Is the threat of automation a legit concern to someone who wants to start a long-term career as a trucker?

Learn to back up a truck well. Cold day in hell a computer can do it. ( they cannot. )

>>1081955
People dont really have "long term careers" as truckers anymore. It destroys you mind and body.

You need to just get a CDL, you need to work for the next 15 years and save literally every single penny. Once you are burnt out like everyone else, you leave and do something else.

>>1081991
It could as long as the trailers also have all the sensors and shit. Hell Ford even has trailer backup assist on their trucks but I'm not sure how well it works

>>1081992
People don't have "long term careers" period. Expect to get fired and move around every 3-5 years. Pretty much no matter what you do

File: 0011-NICKEL-PLATE-ROAD-2-8-4-BERKSHIRE-CLASS-STEAM-LOCOMOTIVE-765-ON-THE-POINT-OF-THE-ERIE-LIMITED-BUFFALO-NY.jpg (554KB, 1200x798px) Image search: [Google]

554KB, 1200x798px

>>1081955
>Is the threat of automation a legit concern to someone who wants to start a long-term career as a trucker?
I'm not clear why this job wasn't lost to automation 150 years ago.

Check /o/ on the truckerfag thread.

They have two owner operators, a guy from rhoel, a guy from swift, a guy from pepsi, a garbage truck driver etc. And they actually know what they are talking about if you can filter through some shitposting.

If you cant get trains fully automated (significantly easier, technology wise) then you cant get an OTR position automated (many more truck drivers than train drivers)

Even if OTR gets automated yard mules at the docks are much more efficient with human operators

>>1082031
muh just in time

>>1082023
I'm not looking to work long term for one company, but some day I would like to be able to make it as an owner operator.

>>1082034
Thanks for the heads up

>>1082023
Maybe if you suck ass or a monkey tier tradesman.
>DDC guy here, I would never get fired, and if I did quit, I could have 5 job offers in a day.

>>1082023
I think he meant, driving a truck in general.

But if you get into a job that isnt volatile, youll never move up.
The people who have long term careers with a single company hit their ceiling and stay put. Usually not making a gigantic amount of money.

When you are working somewhere else, the only way to actually move up is to put in time for experience, and then get hired at another job with a pay raise.

Automated trucking isn't going to happen for years. You -might- see it in Texas and Florida, where it never snows and road conditions are fairly predictable. In the rust belt? I'd like to see a computer react to black ice with 80K behind it.

Plus, you have to consider the fact that a lot of fleets already cheap as shit, and they aren't going to spend the money on replacing their entire fleet with automated trucks.

You have nothing to worry about in long-term job prospects OP. Automated trucks are still a pip dream, and what you see in videos is closed course driving that was probably rescheduled because it was raining the day before and nearly caused a crash.

>>1081955
I wouldn't get worried until the tech companies start footing the bill for highway infrastructure that incorporates more sensors and special paint. Otherwise, it's going to be a long time because the roads are in horrible shape. We're not going to have self-driving commercial trucks on shitty, crumbling roads with fading markings.

>>1082031
You are telling me.
I work for UP and PTC was supposed to be implemented this year. they got it extended. PTC might only eliminate 1 of the 2 crew members. It's on fucking rails for gods sake. Forward, Back, Stop, Go. I would think it is much less complicated than a truck in 5 lanes of traffic.

>>1081955
yeah its a bad idea. find a better dream job that actually requires some skill and knowledge.

Wtf

Budweiser recently completed their first automated "beer run" with a self-driving truck.

The driver was still in the truck, but only had to get the truck to the highway and then turned on the auto-driver and then could chill in the cab.

If anything, trucker's don't have much to worry about as it will just make their job easier.

>>1082164
>A computer with instantaneous access to tire slippage measurements versus a guy who won't react for 500 milliseconds.
Mhmm okay.

>>1082340
>as it will just make their job easier.

It will make wages plummet.

I'm so glad I work in a trade. To replace your average electrician/plumber/HVAC/whatever they need to make a robot that essentially functions like a human being with manipulator limbs capable of using hundreds of different tools and tactile feedback for things like stripping cable and that's a fair way off yet.

>>1082478
Dont be so shortsighted
What do you think factory workers, mcdonalds workers, truck drivers are going to do when their jobs get automated?

They will flood the trade market.

>>1082506
>What do you think factory workers, mcdonalds workers, truck drivers are going to do when their jobs get automated?
good things none of those are a skilled trade and you cant just become an electrician by wishing it and btw factory maintenance will never be completely automated

>>1082516
Good thing a skilled trade isnt actually hard to learn right?

I love how people talk as if they are something special, like somehow they knew everything before they got into their trade or that they are somehow superior to everyone else out there.
>only I could get an internship or take a 4 week technical class!

Youll have a surplus of people willing to learn a trade (especially as other jobs dwindle) , in a time where we are paying trade workers very good wages because of demand.
Unless you think that your everyday joe with a family just going to go hungry.

>>1082516
Also replacing factory workers with automation is to cut down on the work force.
Losing 90% of the jobs while only keeping maintenance doesnt change anything.

All those kids with degrees saying they cant find a job? Theyll be shoehorned in over a lowly factory worker.

And what are those people going to do, go to get a full 4 year college degree 15 years late?
Trades and the short technical programs at their community college, theyll be bearing down on you and your job.

>>1082540
>or that they are somehow superior to everyone else out there.

Usually this is a sign for a tradesman not being any good. Atleast in my experience.

>we're the best installers in town!

Then why do I have to fix half your shit ?

>>1082456
He's probably the same guy who said a computer could never drive a truck because only the human brain can do all the fluid dynamics calculations if you're taking a load of water up a hill or something.

What the fuck, like he's actually doing anything besides taking a guess, hoping the baffels are engineered right, and puckering his asshole?

>>1081991
>Learn to back up a truck well. Cold day in hell a computer can do it. ( they cannot. )

Cute.

Let me let you in on some info:

There is absolutely no kind of object manipulation, at all, that a robot cannot be made to do better than a human, and with only current technology. None. They, if at all well-designed, have access to streams of sensor data that you would never be able to keep track of, and processing an appropriate reaction to its current situation even 10ms (even an extremely fast, practiced human doesn't have twitch reflexes much faster than 100ms) would be going through it SLOWLY.

The only three things keeping robots from just being straight-up better than humans are at _everything_:

1.) Visual interpretation and analysis of the world around them.
2.) Learning capability.
3.) Energy storage.


Only one of these problems is actually relevant to autonomous vehicles (vision), and, as it is, you're lucky it's arguably the most difficult to solve. But "can't back up a truck"? Hilarious.

>>1082602
I don't have it anymore but in the last thread, someone posted a simulation of a truck with two trailers coming out of one hole, and backing up and feeding everything straight back throuhg another hole about 10' away. It did all manuvers within the square length of the truck-trailer system.

>>1082602
4) cost

>>1082637
They are already cheaper than US workers. Chinese wages increase every year as they try to become a more civilized country.

It wont be long

>>1081955
>This is my dream job and I'm ready to sign up to a driving school, but I don't want to get my hopes up yet.

Your only concern should be your own career, and that's a safe bet for many years especially if you get experience with specialty loads. A driverless truck doesn't load itself.

Towing. Will probably be around longer than trucking. When you are pulling up that broken truck from the ditch. Can't be easy for a robot, or it will be insanely expensive.

>>1082456
Even if it were technically possible (and in ideal conditions it probably is), you'd have to wade through the legalities. Automated vehicles are a thorny issue at the moment, especially since that fatality in the Tesla - imagine the public response if an 18 wheelers "infallible" guidance system drove it into the side of a school bus. Even if automation resulted in fewer overall deaths the fatalities that did occur would be more difficult to justify as they could invariably be argued to have been preventable had a human operator been present.

In the long run though, automating trucks is a quaint, ass-backwards solution akin to creating mechanical horses to make ploughing fields easier. Freight should be carried by rail or, when dirigibles make their return, by air. There's probably more scope for automation there too since the vehicles won't be sharing routes with civilian fleshbags.

>>1082602
If what you're saying is true, where the hell are my sexbots?

>>1081955

Just remember this:

Planes have been automated since the 1980's. And they fly in ONE SOLID PATH FROM A TO B WITHOUT OBSTACLES OR TRAFFIC LIGHTS.

So....

The whole car automation thing is pretty silly. What if there is ice on the road? What if a deer jumps out? Pothole? Constructions? Oil slick?

There's 1,000 random things that can happen when a person is driving that there is no way for a computer to visualize and account for.

I usually turn the TCS off on cars I drive, because the decision the computer makes is usually worse for a skid situation, than the decision I would make as the driver.

>>1081955
Tl;dr NO. Drive forever. Personnel carriers may be automated, but semis and trucks will never be. Prototypes, sure. But never commercially viable. Driver offers problemsolving and initiative, and the singularity is not about to happen for at least 19 years.

>>1082164
>where it never snows and road conditions are fairly predictable
This is probably the most obvious problem. Here in Michigan there are a lot of roads where the lines on the road aren't very clear, the roads are full of holes, and that's when they aren't covered in snow for half the year. Same case for many other areas of the country that experience winter. From what I have seen, this is a major issue with automation. Maybe you could get certain roads upgraded to a point where they will be navigable by trucks driven by computer, but that still leaves the last mile of delivery.

>>1082467
I imagine the regular, non-highway driving is harder though

>>1083624
You know that google drove a reporter from San Francisco to Las Vegas right? Not a special road or anything. Just driving down the road, getting on the highway and pulling up to the guys hotel.

>>1081955

The reality of driving in an urban environment is that it's about risk minimization, there often is no right way to do something ... just various shitty ways which all break traffic regulations.

Then there's the problem of anticipation of people doing dumb shit, especially cyclists and pedestrians.

No one is putting a driverless car on the road till we have human level AI.

>>1083691

Pretty much all the issues being mentioned in previous posts are already being solved.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiwVMrTLUWg&feature=youtu.be&t=7m45s

File: sweat forms on my forehead.jpg (77KB, 539x526px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 539x526px

>>1083730
>Car driving through construction zone, dealing with cones
>Dealing with traffic officers directing traffic
>Dealing with emergency vehicles

>11:00
>Car is making a left
>Oh nope, it's making a U-term, I'll stop nicely.
bu-bu-bu-bu-buh but computers could never do my jawwwbbbbbbb

I dunno anything about trucking really, but probably nobody's going to trust a gas tanker to computers for the time being. So I expect that would be a safe job for a few decades at least.

>>1083730
nice

>>1081970
>Unions will start creating laws preventing companys from going full automation.

Governments are finding out that people with nothing to do are a threat to social stability.

File: IMG_20161115_091357.jpg (2MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2448x3264px

>>1083749
>>1083691
>>1083659
>>1083651
>>1083632
>>1083624
Etc.

This is from yesterday's paper. It's like Volvo is reading anons mind!
As it is in a obscure language you don't understand as you aren't from the country of glory and heroes I'll translate the main points.
-Volvo is driving towards automation
-Volvo CEO wants the trucks automated
-they have driverless cars operating in controlled environments, meaning mines and quarrys. An interesting idea I'd say, that's the perfect spot to test. Go Volvo!
-the CEO wants heavy traffic to be automated so that the car can drive without pauses and do not require a salary. Unlike the car without a driver.

And there are valid points. I work with a guy who also is an entrepreneur. He has I think five fuel trucks. And he has a problem, he'd need the cars to be on the road more but having more night shifts and those are expensive. To full a gas station he gets some hundred euros and in the 65ton truck you can't fit fuel for too many stations, meaning the margins are low. Too low.
So imagine now, you replace a truck with an automated one, it will drive 30-50% more, 200%if you are on an cross-country or - continental trip. The driver isn't allowed to drive for more than 8h per day over here!
Suddenly you get an boost in efficiency AND cut the drivers cost. There most certainly is an interest for this, those who can put in the mostly one-time cost of an automated truck will have significant savings in the long run.
And remember, Volvo is from the north so they are used to the snow, I bet others are too!

File: 1342773751063.jpg (23KB, 482x355px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 482x355px

>>1083615

All over, if you look.

...the only problem is that they are still pretty obviously sexbots.

File: laughing cheetah.jpg (102KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 640x427px

>>1083730

>11:11

>>1081955
Op. It was my dream job and ended up the worst fucking year of my life.

Dont go to truck driving school.

U will fucking hate your life.

Do litterally anything else.

U have been warned

>>1082034
Former central refrigerated and dump truck owner operator here. Im headed over there. Also. Do not fucking go to central wtf ever u do. Or swift.

If you're looking for paid training, Prime is pretty solid.

>>1084468
This.
There's a reason the average trucker works for less than a year.
But no, a robot won't terk yer jerb in the next several years.

My dad works as a dispatcher for truckers and used to drive himself.

When i needed a job i worked there for a while.

A useful peace of advice he gave me the first day is that:
>Truckin' ain't 'bout driving it's 'bout making sure you keep truckin'

Aka its not about driving the truck form A to B its about making sure that whatever brakes, changes etc your truck gets from A to B. Driving is the simplest part.
Thats why unless they make a truck that can change its own tire on a dirt road in bum fuck nowhere, fix it's air compressor with a chewing-gum and band-aids form the first aid kit, figure out what that strange noise coming from the trailer is, there will always be a job for truckers.

>>1084964
>what is preventative maintenance.
I'm sorry your fleet is managed badly and you break down regularly.

>Mine is too

For as many jobs that can be fully automated, there are just as many that can't.

I'd love to see the robot that can dodge mudholes hauling fresh timber out of a forest all day long.

>>1082031
it is in countries that matter

>>1082039
my good friend is a female owner operator. she bought a truck after like three years. she makes over 105k a year. i didn't believe her and she showed me her check stub. she told me if i got my cdl i could take over whenever i wanted to work. its a pretty sweet deal except for the food and shitting. i have a friend who is also a dr and makes less after insurance and med school bills

>automated trucking
Not gonna happen.

Hell even actually efficient and useful automated welding won't happen for a long while.

>>1085452
>Hell even actually efficient and useful automated welding won't happen for a long while.

In the field anyway, and what noobs forget is even automated vehicle assembly lines have manual rework.

Good luck getting a robot to reach behind boiler tubes, cut out damage, and TIG the repair.

>>1085472
Damn right.
I work for a shop where we make aluminum radiators and everything that possibly can be automated already is and we're at least 3 welders around the clock to build them, one of us makes repairs exclusively.

Welding robots actually kinda suck, except for well set submerged arc ones but that's a moot point because SAW can't be done by hand in the first place.

>>1082340
Damn The Simpsons were right again

>>1085452
> useful automated welding won't happen for a long while.
Its been happening for the last decade. Small shops are the only holdouts.

> what noobs forget is even automated vehicle assembly lines have manual rework.

And what short sighted people forget is that the automated welding line eliminate the need for a large chunk of existing production welders.
The market is already over saturated, once it becomes viable for small shops the welding bubble will crash.

Field welding will be swamped even more with former production welders. The remaining production guys will get shittier wages.

Its not some crazy dystopian novel, its reality of whats happening and will continue to happen. Its a slippery slope that everyone is currently on.

>>1085475
>Welding robots actually kinda suck

This isnt true as much as you want it to be

>>1085482
>once it becomes viable for small shops
It won't for a long time, that's the thing.
Are you actually a welder or are you just talking out of your ass

>>1085482
>Its a slippery slope that everyone is currently on.
We've been saying this for 200 years.

>>1085452
funnily enough that's what I'm doing my dissertation on. it's closer than you think, I'm working on making to algorithm for auto welding. If I'm doing you bet companies are.

>>1085484
I am a "tool maker", I pretty much just sandcast shit that engineers prototype, then when it gets approved I send it out for production. I work in a manufacturing plant that makes heavy machinery for a fucking gigantic company.

I have to work directly with small shops, its cheaper for small runs of medium to small sized parts.

I see firsthand the large sized shops who have automated their processes vs small shops who havent.
The small shops are always laying people off, using temp agencies to bring people in for short periods of time. Ive seen probably 4 go under since I started my apprenticeship.

No actual machinists exist anymore, they all use CNC mills, lathes, and other cutting tools. They literally just input files I give them.

I know of at least 1 of the larger shops we have that has an articulated welding arm bot. I doubt they use it on the parts we order from them, but they have one. And they are one of the better shops snuffing the others out.

And I live in a small city of 150k people.
These welding bots dont cost more than a CNC do, they are obtainable.
Hoping and praying wont make them go away

>>1085485
>We've been saying this for 200 years.

Yeah, the only difference is 200 years ago the pinnacle of technology was a steam train.
Now we literally have lights out factories running in china. Its only a matter of time before they are here in the USA.

>>1085491
Robot welders can only make what you program them to.

They can't read plans
They can't set their own parameters
They can't use multiple processes
They can't do more than one specific task
They can't do fitting
They can't solve problems
They can't repair their mistakes

I don't know where you live but here production welding is a small part of the trade, most of us do that to acquire some shop experience before moving to more advanced project. And to be frank the things I'm making as a production welder even with all the crazy shit I saw robots do there's just no way they can do that for at least a few decades and it's pretty basic work.

>>1085494
All of those things pretty much apply to a manual machinist too.
Im betting people in the 80s said the same shit.

Now people are employing randoms off the street to learn how to run a CNC. There are no shops still around that dont have CNC for production.

I just dont see how its any different as technology is advancing and getting cheaper every day.

And im not saying that being a welder is a dying job. Obviously there are still manual machinists who prototype in our plant, or run some custom fab shops and shit.
If you get into a place as a master machinist, youll be doing pretty fucking good for yourself.
But the market for standard old "machinists" 30 years ago and today is a completely different thing.

Im not sure why the shift wouldnt happen with welding too.

>>1085500
It's gonna happen with welding too, but much less quickly and with a lot more hurdles.
Thing is that machining does take expertise but it's still something inherently narrow task-wise while welding is a much broader trade. Even in a production context, welding is only a small part of the job and as of now it's the only thing a robot can do on its own and it's still pretty limited even at that.

>>1082031
>I'm not clear why this job wasn't lost to automation 150 years ago.

Because you don't know anything about railroad technology of the time. A skilled engineer was the difference between an uneventful trip and a wreck or boiler explosion or both.

"Big smoky thing must be simple, hurr, durr!" KYS.

>>1085500
Manual machinists are in demand in many areas because it's much faster to cut metal than code, set up, and cut metal for many jobs in repair machining or simple, single or small run production.

If you want to do well, learn CNC and manual processes. Random "button pushers" only load parts touch off tools, etc. There is a lot more to machining than that. Don't work mass production unless it's a good deal. Become a machine repair tech instead.

Hybrid shops can make good money. I just lost a bid on a Warner and Swasey turret lathe to a gent who uses them because he can beat CNC cycle times on some parts with a turret lathe. He retired from CNC grinding jet engine blades and is thoroughly versed in CNC. He owns a couple of recent CNC centers too. It's all about money. He can buy a used manual machine in good condition for a grand or less, then make more than that on the first job. My machinistbro has two WWII era American Pacemaker lathes which make him money every week. If he had to buy new it would be prohibitive, but his mix of manual, CNC, and dual use machines like his Bridgeport EZ-Trak make him buckets of cash. BTW he buys most of his tooling at insane savings off Ebay and at auctions.

CNC or manual, knowing what to do matters. Ditto with welding. A fab shop monkey with a MIG gun is much fucking different from a nuke plant boiler tube welder. People ignorant of those tasks (including those who have peripheral contact with the jobs but don't personally know how to perform them) are prone to ignorant generalizations.

If you get good, you'll have work, so get good and get versatile. If you can machine and/or weld and lack work, you either picked a bad place to live or you suck.

>>1083624

>What if there is ice on the road? What if a deer jumps out? Pothole? Constructions? Oil slick?

Computers can handle all these situations better than humans. And yes they do see potholes and deer just fine. For ice and oil slicks they react better than most any human.

File: 2fee2f22df92599f32548438b362e8eb3fbff3dd523934765d13d65063ac8869.png (1MB, 752x732px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 752x732px

>>1083691
>No one is putting a driverless car on the road till we have human level AI.

These cars are already on the road and are operating autonomously in some states.

Tesla is delivering cars toady with full autonomous capability built in and will be enabled as soon as regulators approve. All model 3's will have full autonomous capabilities built in from the start. And they only cost 35k.

Buckle up fagot. Shits going to get real. I expect autonomous vehicles to be approved nationally next year for all 50 states.

>>1087111

One engineer and a couple linemen vs 200 semi truck drivers.

>B-but its not total automation.

kys fagot

File: KEK.png (224KB, 648x567px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 648x567px

>>1084158
They sure are.

File: 1f3a04821a94624e9701f56c83b20deb_original.png (556KB, 680x398px) Image search: [Google]

556KB, 680x398px

Bro you're fucking late to the party. Automation is already here...
https://youtu.be/PwWbMckm8Zw