automation

communist propagands thread

do not reply

PROPGANDA WORKS BY REPETITION

you will see this thread pop up multiple times DAILY

>>131191510
well, that's why the administration should take over business in the name of the worker

>>131191758

muh communism

>>131191510

society will have to change along with it if it's to work

File: 80-YEARS-Progress-1.jpg (158KB, 944x550px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 944x550px

This is a communist propaganda :)

>>131191510
>lead to a complete economic and societal collapse

Not necessarily. It will allow for humans to eventually not have to work for force. I think before we have UBI for people displaced by automation we should

1) Completely cut off any type of immigration into the country
2) Start limiting reproduction by basis of IQ and usefulness to society

>>131191758

I don't think it's a communist thread. We're no where near the need for human replacement, but somewhere in the future it will be needed.

File: young ted kaczynski.jpg (57KB, 287x425px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 287x425px

>>131191510
You are absolutely right

Ted Kaczynski did nothing wrong

>>131191510

If anyone tells you that full automation would be a good idea tell them that that's when the robots encounter the Singularity and kill us all

> the printing press will put scribes out of business
> the word processor will put paper distributors out of business
> the neural net shitpost bots will put shills out of business

>>131191510
We've been automating since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Before that we used slaves

I think we'll be fine

>>131191873
>the administration
so much for the people ever owning the means of production

>>131192031
no way it will lead to idiocracy/Wall-E

>>131191510
>don't have a babby
>he won't have to deal with any of this shit
>I get to die someday

Automation can be good for small businesses and farms.

But we need the will to own and control it, instead of being cowardly slugs to one joo corporation that rules the world.

>>131192418
>I think we'll be fine
Why should we care what a retard thinks?

File: подсмотренно-5.jpg (455KB, 1000x797px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 1000x797px

>>131191510
You are right coming to /pol/.

This palace loves to circlejerk about
>MUH JEEEEBS

When in 10 years literally everyone here will be replaced by AI

(yes including CS majors you are the first ones to go faggots)

File: 363fd0573d82e7673e50f43de5111575.jpg (149KB, 736x1002px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 736x1002px

>>131191510
They're called singularitarians. They believe that science fiction is a prophecy.

Humans are extremely efficient machines and it's hard to believe that any machine will ever be cheaper to operate than we are.

It won't lead to anything, because it's not economically feasible.

>>131192031
and what do you think is going to happen to all those people that lost their jobs to robots?
do you think their just going to stand by while you institute a eugenics program and force them into perpetual unemployment and poverty?
do you think is going to be a good thing when small businesses that cant afford automation die off and get swallowed by rich multinationals or god forbid a nationalized state run business?

>>131192418
and that caused issues as well. slavery almost killed the roman republic, it almost destroyed the united states makeing the south almost completely dependent on slaves (the south still never fully recovered from this btw)

>>131192899
you say that like its a good thing.
>ha ha your gonna get replaced by robots and forced into perpetual poverty.
>better vote for bernie so you can live on welfare for the rest of your life and send your kids to a liberal arts colage

>>131191510

I agree with OP. We need to go back to the better time when each family spun its own yarn and made its own cloth, and grew all its food and eggs or hunted for their own meat.

Crap like the internet, cars, planes, electricity are the main factors in the degeneracy of today's youth.

Nice thread OP. I'll keep it bumped.

No wait, I'm turning off my computer and shutting down my electricity because I'm smart like OP.

>>131192031
>We're no where near the need for human replacement

Human workers are a liability, though. Machines do everything for the cost of maintenance and they do it without breaks. And they sure are more efficient than all the lazy fleshniggers.

>>131193186
your misrepresenting what im saying.
im fine with technology and industrialization but that needs to be balanced with with the need for jobs and for a healthy sustainable economy.

>>131192553

Nah, idiots won't be allowed to breed.

>>131193105

You mean do you think people are going to accept money from the state to not work and basically pursue things that make them happy and entertain them while getting paid for it? Absolutely. Most of these people don't want to have children in the first place, and since they're usually idiots it will benefit society.

>>131193287

When I mean we're nowhere near I mean that technology hasn't got there yet.

>>131193418

If you're using that argument then lets take away all the back hoes and shovels and give workers tea spoons to dig with. There will always be work then!

>>131193418
That's socialism.

>>131193418
>but that needs to be balanced with with the need for jobs
No. A healthy economy doesn't require people. You just shift to a perpetual wartime economy where the people are only useful as meat for the grinder. The military buys everything you make to feed the endless war.

Shit is just going to get worst, because the common man no longer has a point in their existence.

Worst possible future. Congrats, everyone.

File: 1498029476781.png (195KB, 1382x850px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 1382x850px

>>131193542
>Absolutely. Most of these people don't want to have children in the first place, and since they're usually idiots it will benefit society.

Lazy idiots are the most prolific breeders. You give them money and in two generations civilization won't have the ability to maintain itself.

So what's the Amish birthrate these days?

>>131191510
Neither of your arguments conflict with each other and both are true. Globalism will be useless if automation comes to pass because all that low skilled labor becomes a liability for the economy. Globalists however believe that they can sustain the under classes through gratuitous welfare programs, but it's naïve optimism to think that it's a possibility. We are genuinely fucked when automation takes off. Neither the right nor the left is prepared to deal with automation.

>>131193727

I see you will be one of the ones being sterilized.

Lazy idiots have to agree to sterilization before receiving any benefits. No government benefits are given otherwise. You either make it on your own and work or get sterilized.

>>131193831
Automation will not take off. You cannot automate most jobs for cheaper than paying humans to do them.

>>131193418
>im fine with technology and industrialization but that needs to be balanced

but you are saying exactly what they said when the textile industry was first developed, and you're like those people who think the family farm is some kind of spiritual thing.

You are just the 2017 version of it.

You can't turn back the clock pal. We need to adapt, and we will adapt. Right now some form of basic income is needed. Then we pay whatever it takes to get someone on a hot roof or down in a smelly sewer. Talented people will still want to design and build awesome things, but lots of us will get to stay home and play on the internet or work on our tennis game or grow a garden for kicks.

Opposing technological progress "just because" has always been retarded, anon.

>>131191510
With out human customers that can afford their wares, how would automated companies survive?

>>131191510
Automation is inevitable.

There's no reason why humans should be working in factories these days. Let machines do those jobs.

Bring on the technological utopia where robots do all the work.

>>131193928
>Automation will not take off.

No need for an umbrella. The rain falling will stop midway to the ground.

>>131193866
Do you really believe in a politically correct society something like this would be possible? Do you really believe that voters would allow such a program to be implemented? It's going to be absolute chaos when all the low skilled labor revolts and confiscates the wealth of society.

>>131193866
>I see you will be one of the ones being sterilized.
Like fuck i will.

>Lazy idiots have to agree to sterilization before receiving any benefits. No government benefits are given otherwise. You either make it on your own and work or get sterilized.
No politician or political body will ever call for a vote for such a thing and no group of people would ever vote for it. Unless you somehow undid the last 50 years of brainwashing.

Singularitarians always refuge in poorly thought out eugenics when the economic prospects of their ideas come up bankrupt.

>>131194056
>argument from analogy

Nice post-modernism you got there.

>>131194187
Automation is already in progress. Tens of billions of dollars are being spend. Everything from retail clerks to food prep to fucking general physicians.

>>131191510
An alternative result could be that it motivates those small business employees to acquire and develop new skills required for different fields of work.

>>131194035
>>131194000

A basic income is a Venezuela tier policy. It takes resources that could be used for investment and instead redistributes them for consumption. Meaning the supply of goods cannot increase because the taxes used to fund basic income will come from potential capital used for investment. It's unrealistic to think that people who don't do anything will somehow coexist with the productive elements of society. A future that doesn't need you won't include you.

>>131191510
Im working as nurse.I do not worry about my profession...

>>131194082
>Do you really believe in a politically correct society something like this would be possible? Do you really believe that voters would allow such a program to be implemented? It's going to be absolute chaos when all the low skilled labor revolts and confiscates the wealth of society.

No, I don't think people would ever go for anything like that, which is why I think we will never have any UBI in our life time. Also

>It's going to be absolute chaos when all the low skilled labor revolts and confiscates the wealth of society

top lel. The low skilled labor class can barely muster enough intellect to go to the store for a 6 pack, and often they're too lazy to leave the house. As long as their fat and happy they won't do shit. Get fucked commie.

>>131194111

Good, you have nothing to worry about then. We will never have UBI so long as reproduction and immigration remain unchecked.

>>131194327
Ah that explains why the Concorde is still flying, to borrow an analogy.

>>131194327
And before you ask how doctors can be replaced, it's because the machines diagnose faster and more accurately and have no wait time.

Autodocs are coming because they're just better.

Not even fucking lawyers are safe.

>>131191510
Partial automation will occur within our lifetimes as the population has generally declined, and it'll hit us like a sack of bricks if we don't recognize this early on

Though if the Jews have their way, robits will be the least of our problems

>>131194448
>Good, you have nothing to worry about then. We will never have UBI so long as reproduction and immigration remain unchecked.

I can't tell if you're being sardonic still because what you said was 100% correct.

>>131192409
Those were right

>>131194358
You just don't live in the real world.

The wealthy elites are already spending billions to save worthless niggers in Africa. You don't seriously think that people are going to be left to starve in developed countries do you?

Capitalism can't last. Everyone knows that perpetual growth isn't possible.

>>131194527
Nobody trusts robots. The robots will only serve the poorest of people and they will likely be programmed to actively hurt those people.

>>131194358
>A basic income is a Venezuela tier policy.

perhaps. You DO agree that in 50 or 100 or 1000 years there will come a time when humans won't have to do very much work in order to have plenty of food, clothing, and toys, don't you?

A basic income or something equivalent is in the future. As a matter of fact, getting the money grubbers out of tech jobs and medicine and other jobs that require skill and dedication would be a wonderful thing.

>>131194604
>Capitalism can't last. Everyone knows that perpetual growth isn't possible.
So sell your computer and go live on land nobody owns. Go ahead.

>>131194448
In our current society they have plenty of power because they can vote. It won't be the lazy fucks who confiscate the property, but the state. There will be a period of transition where democracy Will suffer an existential crisis where the vast majority of voters are net takers and society like how Brazil or Venezuela operate. Democracy only works when the population voting is productive, otherwise the non-productive overwhelmed the system and utilize the state to implement poor economic policies. As of 2016 we aren't there yet but in 2040 we will be

>>131193041
>it's hard to believe that any machine will ever be cheaper to operate than we are.
Then you'd better start. Humans are only "efficient" because the infrastructure to create and train a human worker has been set up for thousands of years, whereas computers have existed for less than a century. As computing power and machine intelligence improves, the efficiency of software and robotic hardware will improve as well. It's an accelerating process.

There is nothing a human can do that a sufficiently advanced machine cannot, and given enough resources and infrastructure for the takeoff, machine labor becomes far more efficient than any human's.

This shit is not even speculative sci-fi futuristic nonsense, it's happening right now as we speak.

>>131191510

Yes, but it will make the rich much richer. Free market and all that...

Keep voting Republican, that will stop it.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

>>131194653
>Nobody trusts robots.

People trust robots more than they trust other people. This has been proven.

>>131191510
Universal basic income. Wow that was fucking hard! I just solved all the worlds problems that doesn't require the genocide of blacks and muslims.

>>131191758
That would mean all the blowjob Trump Cuck threads Are communist propaganda. The only propaganda is you being a bitch and wanting a safe space.

Get a job fuckface.

>>131194714
>perhaps. You DO agree that in 50 or 100 or 1000 years there will come a time when humans won't have to do very much work in order to have plenty of food, clothing, and toys, don't you?
Who told you that? Bill Nye? Science Fiction? Black Science Man?

Antibiotics don't work anymore and oil is running out with no replacement. We'll be lucky if we have anything resembling civilization in a thousand years.

>>131194732
What kind of a shitty non argument is that?

I'm saying that a century from now, capitalism as we know it won't exist. That doesn't mean people should throw away their possessions and go live in a cave somewhere.

You're like a serf in the middle ages who can't imagine a world without feudalism.

>>131191758
fpbp
sage all zog propaganda

>>131194604

They spend that money because they've weaponized third-world immigration to destroy the middle class of Western countries. The next step is using the drones to kill everyone who isn't the wealthy elite.

>>131194876
Why waste money maintaining a surplus? Draft everyone ages 16-50 and send them to die in Syria and Iran!

Like a business!

>>131192409
All that happened tho.

You forgot

> the automobile will put horse buggy whip manufacturers out of business.

>>131194714
Man will merge with machine and genetic engineering will give humanity the edge over standard hardware. The cybernetic revolution will reassert mankind dominance. When we all have IQs above 120 and can seamlessly interface with machines then mankind will be productive enough to avoid the scourge of automation

>>131191510
It's as inevitable as all the farm machinery we have today, but didn't have hundreds of years ago

We will probably have some sort welfare, but at some point even the army will be composed of robots, so the plebs will be completely useless.
So what will end up happening is the government prohibiting you from having children and having them grow up in artificial wombs with top tier genes instead.

The only hope for you and your bloodline is eugenics, so your genes sneak their way into the breeding tanks

>>131193727
Stupid. With smartphones the world population is smarter than even a century ago. It's 100000x smarter than it was 5 centuries ago.

>>131194771
>Then you'd better start. Humans are only "efficient" because the infrastructure to create and train a human worker has been set up for thousands of years
Uh, try 3.8 billion years. It took a long fucking time for anything to become energy efficient enough to walk on land, much less have the kind of sentience and locomotion we do. We don't need complex industry or thousands of experts just to be born and live and work. How the fuck do you think we got to this point?

>As computing power and machine intelligence improves
Fundamentally limited.

>It's an accelerating process.
Nope. Diminishing returns. Technology follows a sigmoid curve, not an exponential one. You don't know much about the world it seems.

>There is nothing a human can do that a sufficiently advanced machine cannot
A human can live on a dollar a day in today's money and still work the whole day through. A machine cannot.

>>131194779
>this has been proven
Yeah that's bullshit.

>>131195028
This is tinfoil tier propaganda. If the elites wanted us dead they would just poison the water supply or nuke us while hiding in their bunkers.

>>131191510
Automation makes perfect sense once the no longer necessary underclass is purged. What did you think the elite's endgame was?

>>131194027
By selling stuff to other companies, company owners and their families and the remaining irreplaceable elites.

Rest of the mankind will probably have a close encouncer of deadly kind with hunter killer drone.

Bieng son of a rich man would be more awesome than ever. From your teenage years, you’d own dozens of medieval castles (each with its own private airport), fleed of cruise ships, fleet of private supersonic jets, spaceship, harem full of top grade escorts, army of robot servants and AI slaves attending to your every whim.

File: 1498332131008.jpg (230KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1280x720px

>>131191510
fify

File: I_disagree_we_must_go_to_a_fully_automated_luxury__5e6466d8e77bc2391f2ad4829ab03c0d.jpg (120KB, 750x537px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 750x537px

>>131193542
>You mean do you think people are going to accept money from the state to not work and basically pursue things that make them happy and entertain them while getting paid for it? Absolutely.
>Most of these people don't want to have children in the first place, and since they're usually idiots it will benefit society.
a lot of people aren't going to go along with that. you can pacify lazy niggers and suburban millennials like that but blue collar workers aren't going to stand by and watch their way of life disappear.

>If you're using that argument then lets take away all the back hoes and shovels and give workers tea spoons to dig with. There will always be work then!
again your misrepresenting what im sayin to make it easier to attack.

you can have machines to aid the work but it needs to be balanced with the fact that people need to make a living and keep the economy afloat

>>131194000
see the above

>>131194773
t.retard

this is exactly why people voted for trump. millions saw their jobs disappear under obama, clinton, and bush and get replaced by robots and foreign labor.

>>131194876
it wont be that simple. what happens to all the people who are now out of work and forced to suck on the government teat just to survive? do you think they are going to become bitter and lash out against the government and society doing this?

>>131194949
>capitalism as we know it won't exist. That doesn't mean people should throw away their possessions and go live in a cave somewhere.
Okay cunt how do you explain how we go from capitalism to no capitalism without eugenics programs?

>>131195168
>the world population is smarter than even a century ago
Not even a little bit. They read more, but process and understand far less. You know why? They don't know how to memorize. All those people who live on their cellphones, so what? How many educational books do they read on them per year? Zero? All they read is facebook and buzzfeed and reddit and all those places do is reinforce their naive notions of how the world ought to be.

Nobody reads anymore. Most people i've asked say they haven't read a book since they were forced to in high school.

Technology enables humans to do things without having to think about them.

It's never wise to do things without thinking about it.

>>131195321
But that isn't the elites end game. The elite truly believe that they will be able to sustain the under classes forever because in a globalist mind resources are unlimited. The concept of scarcity doesn't apply to the most powerful people on earth because they are so decadent they haven't known want in their life. We imported all this labor and now automation makes this labor a liability. But good luck getting a globalist to admit this because it's like talking to a zombie when you actually meet them in real life or on four Chan.

File: A011944.jpg (72KB, 512x317px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 512x317px

>>131191510
People like you have always existed. They're called "Luddites".The unknown is a very scary thing but :
>automation - driverless cars etc.
>transhumanism
>technocracy
>corporate media propaganda
>constant surveilance state
>perpetual never-ending drone warfare [happening now]
>population control

It's all inevitable.How is marching on the streets going to stop 24/7 driverless cars tracking ? It isn't.Most of this is here now.Our outrage is like having 100 muskets that only fire one shot but we have 10,000 enemy slowly grinding towards us.
>but we can take out their leadership!

When Rothschild just recently died has this agenda slowed down? No,it's actually sped up quite a bit. The only solution to this dystopic nightmarish future is wiping the slate clean [debt jubilee,making the banks public etc.] and that's never going to happen. They control the Senate. They control the Congress. They control it all and even if we got a good President in the white house they'd just impeached him if he made any real moves to stopping this insanity.

>>131195563
>Okay cunt how do you explain how we go from capitalism to no capitalism without eugenics programs?
Why the fuck do we need a eugenics program?

Explain that first.

>>131195724
Calling someone a luddite is probably the most blue-pilled action a person can take other than letting a nigger fuck their wife.

Your understanding of the world is derived from fiction from the same jews you decry. How ironic.

>>131195750
Singularitarians always resort to that. Don't ask me why i'm not a crazy child who thinks star trek is real.

>>131195286

That is exactly what they are doing, only in a way that's less disruptive to the scenery.

>>131192263
I don't think the machines will make that decision, it makes sense for the small group of elites who control them all to use them to kill off the masses and repopulate earth with their bloodlines. from an absolute power standpoint.

>>131195750
What is the point of being left wing if change doesn't mean progress? The left today is anti progress and they want to change the world into the third world. Do you think people in the dark ages wanted more barbarism and more backwardness in their lives? No they ruthlessly reformed their society because they didn't want to be backwards anymore. It's left-wingers like you that are going to destroy progress instead of creating it

>>131194035
Factory worker here, we are light years away from not needing humans at all.

The fact that you think this shows you are very ignorant of how factories as a whole function

Shut your dumb fucking cockholster

>>131195255
>Uh, try 3.8 billion years.
Homo sapiens has not been around for 3.8 billion years you clown. I'm talking about a modern, productive man living in societies with division of labor.

>fundamentally limited
As is the productive power and intelligence of humans. We're basically at that limit already, whereas we are nowhere near that of computers.

>sigmoid curve
And your presupposition, which I'm sure you are eager to support, is that we are on the upper end of that sigmoid curve, rather than at the lower end.

I'm referring to machine intelligence and its effect on the development of machine intelligence. So far, computers and software require human designers at the wheel. We are just now entering the era where machines can be tasked with designing themselves, and improving future iterations of that design. The smarter and more competent the machine becomes, the smarter the future product of its designs will be. It's a positive feedback loop until it hits some sort of hard physical limit.

>still work the whole day through
Doing menial labor that a machine can do 24/7 at greatly increased outputs. Is this supposed to support your position?

>>131196024
>>131192263
The singularity is the blue pill.

Deus Ex Machina? Really? Get the fuck out of here.

>>131195955
Give me a historical example of the type of eugenics program you're talking about then. Show me where it has occured previously.

You sound very much like a crazy child when you make absurd statements like that.

>>131196090
isn't it true that a lot of factories are still using DOS and other outdated shit?

>>131192409
All of those things happened.

>>131196090
Nobody in their right mind thinks all jobs will be automated but that less jobs will occur. It takes less people to do the same amount of work, and we're running out of uses for people to do work. Maybe in the future everyone will be servants to the ultrarich because that position can't be automated

The robots would need to radically be improved by such a massive degree compared to what we have now that its practically unfathomable, factories for everything would have to be rebuilt from the ground up to accommodate the assembly system.

Consider a basic fucking task like a spot weld. Contemplate the variety of functions a robot would need to accomplish this would most designs, holding parts together flush, rotating in all directions, moving product in a fashion that metal on metal contact that would mar a finish is minimized.

A space of 6"x6" currently allows a human operator, the spot welder, and parts for the current job to be done efficiently and can do any task from any angle because hands are fucking amazing, let alone the allowance of bracing parts against a body to allow more points of contact to free up said hands for precision and fiddly work.

You could design a set of robots to do this work but it'd be vastly more complicated and space intensive to allow for the hundreds or thousands of different parts assembly a human operator can perform. And that's just a spot weld, the lowest tier of consumer good production basically short of gluing something together.

The up front costs of automation for many industries is absurd when you can hire someone at $10-12/hour in the US to do it. Its something you either have to be an industry leader to afford AND build your facility from the ground up around it.

The return on investment for automation when compared to operating costs with humans is years and years away. Most businesses cannot afford that, and if there's any hiccups in the process they're an enormous pain to fix compared to yelling at Mike the supervisor to yell at Carl, Gus, and Rob the assemblers that to edit their work order.

>>131196252
I work specifically in semi conductor factories and I haven't seen anything older than Windows XP, I would not be surprised to tell you the truth though. If something works they will use it as long as possible

>>131191510
Yeah man, it's a tragedy, if all the houses get fridges milkman (people who deliver milk door to door) will lose all their jobs.

I think we need a universal basic income to solve this problem.

>>131196082
I'm not really "left-wing" mate.

I vote conservative. I like liberal capitalism. I just recognise that it won't last. Everyone with a brain can see that. Our entire economic system is built on perpetual growth.

I'm not saying that it will happen in our lifetime but it will happen eventually.

>>131196090
Like I said, it's not going to happen tomorrow. But it will happen. It's already well underway and you cannot reverse the trend.

Same thing with globalism. We will never go back to isolated nation states. We live in a globalised world now.

>>131196099
>Homo sapiens has not been around for 3.8 billion years you clown. I'm talking about a modern, productive man living in societies with division of labor.
Homo sapiens sapiens did not just spring out of the ground one day. It took 3.8 billion years for us to evolve.

>I'm talking about a modern, productive man living in societies with division of labor.
A dollar a day. You have to make a robot that costs less than a dollar a day in today's dollars to make a robot better than a man. Good fucking luck.

>As is the productive power and intelligence of humans. We're basically at that limit already, whereas we are nowhere near that of computers.
So let me get this straight: We can't predict the future so you predict that in the future computers will be better? Wow dude.

>And your presupposition, which I'm sure you are eager to support, is that we are on the upper end of that sigmoid curve, rather than at the lower end.
We operate machines at temperatures just below the melting point of some of the best materials that we have ever made that never existed on the surface of the earth before us, and we have not discovered any new source of energy in over 60 years.

Yes, obviously we are near the top. If you had any formal education other than reddit you'd know that.

>It's a positive feedback loop until it hits some sort of hard physical limit.
Moore's law is already dead and quantum computers are useless.

>Doing menial labor that a machine can do 24/7 at greatly increased outputs. Is this supposed to support your position?
At 100x the cost. That's not how you run a business.

Can anyone post recutable sources about the future of automation. Is faggot op telling the truth does e have evidence and sources to confirm this theory. I personally believe automation is the future for some jobs, the jobs that truly should be made for robots, looking for info on subject

>>131196224
I'm not the one arguing for eugenics. I'm saying that when you debate someone about the singularity they always resort to eugenics to make their ideas work, you dumb muslim.

>>131196509
What you said was "There's no reason why humans should be working in factories these days. Let machines do those jobs"

That's why I'm correcting you. Today it's laughably impossible. Not because someday in a unicorn faggot filled future it's possible. I'm sure it will be some day.

>>131195336
>By only selling stuff to an elite few

So automation= less productivity? How would that even be competitive?

>>131196757
>I'm sure it will be some day.
But why?

Do you believe in the myth of exponential progress? Why doesn't the concorde fly any more?

>>131195321
You can build any of these machines you want yourself though. Every major advancement in AI is published such that anyone can implement it.

These freezers man, if everyone gets one of these people who go sell ice door to door will lose all their jobs.

We need a universal basic income.

>>131196878
How do you afford the vast quantities of exotic materials? You could at best assemble parts shipped to you, but you could never manufacture them on your own.

ALERT!!!!

(((they))) are pushing this electronic mail bullshit, people who deliver letters will lose all their jobs.

we need a universal basic income.

>>131196435
ok, i remember my dad saying that back in like 2007-8 when he was working in factories.

File: 1489623835026.jpg (160KB, 677x995px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 677x995px

>>131191510

>Kill jobs with an abundance of regulations
>Outsource more jobs
>Kill jobs with NAFTA
>Kill jobs with TPP
>Kill jobs with Obongocare
>Lose jobs to automations

Then
>Open borders
>Flood the country with more people competing for less jobs
>Have the audacity to wonder why CEO wages increase while worker wages stagnant
>Push Universal Basic Income
>Yes, goy. Let the government have total control over your income. You can trust us.
>Oy Vey! We have to suspend your income to penalize you for your counter-semetic comments online!

This is the future liberals wanted.

>>131196934
>Argument from analogy.

Boy it's great to fly on concorde mark five for my daily commute to neo-africa it sure is great that technology is always exponential no matter the cost!

File: image012.png (496KB, 630x300px) Image search: [Google]

496KB, 630x300px

>>131196757
What the fuck are you talking about? Robots already build cars. It's not even something from science fiction, it's happening today.

You're in denial about automation my friend. You'd better get some skills that are actually worth a damn because otherwise you're in for a very rude awakening.

Oh and btw, those jobs that Trump said he would bring back to the US from China? Not going to happen. They're gone forever. Even the Chinese are losing jobs to automation!

>>131196310
>t. welder

>>131197008
>vast quantities of exotic materials
What exotic materials are you talking about? Fabricating integrated circuits is a little beyond current DIY culture but not by much and you can build actuators out of common materials.

File: 1498331293268.png (54KB, 848x753px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 848x753px

>>131191510
Boomers fucked it up for us. This will all end soon as they are out of power.

Plenty of work for those with brains that work.

>>131196857
I mean even the most basic jobs of maintenance could be theoretically performed by machines.

Computers keep getting faster, processes for production get more and more efficient and reliable.

People right now are needed for maintenance and installation in a mostly automated factory.

Tablets are used to control the rate of chemical flows where it probably used to be a guy with a radio and a crank. Eventually none of the human touch will be necessary when we can 3d print an entire factory cheaper than you can pay union John and his alcoholic buddies to do it. For now though John's got some job security

>>131197164
>Robots already build cars.
No they don't. They do limited lifting and welding.

Most of the car is built by people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hw9JrjsPhT8

>>131191510
Automation is fine, universal basic income is not the solution to its problems.

>>131197027
Son... Is that you?

>>131197059
What's preventing you from starting your own business then? Or working as a freelancer/contractor?

Being a wagecuck who depends on an employer for his income isn't much better than depending on the govt for it.

>>131191758
Of course, well over 100 replies.

Fuck you clueless faggots

Sage

>>131192409
Those actually happened, dumbass.

>>131192409
What really happens is a person used to be able to do simple and easy job and make a living, afford a house.

With automation, these jobs are disappearing. With globalism and competition, simple jobs also pay shit because value of a burger flipper or whatever is now so little.

3 choices to survive:
- muh gubbermint, this is what most lazy people do
- learn a skill
- become a producer (set up business)

>>131197345
Automation is ever encroaching on the roles currently assumed by humans.

Soon you won't even need humans to drive those cars let alone build them.

>>131197244
Machinist actually, my job is dirt simple and about as automated as its gonna get any time soon with all the computerized lathes and mills. Just need a guy who knows how to program the coordinates and slap in raw materials every once in awhile. Also I get to yell at the guys on forklifts to come take away a box of whatever I set up the mill to produce.

But I legitimately don't see how the guys down the aisle in welding are gonna be replaced by machines any time soon unless the product line narrowed dramatically. There's simply too many moving parts.

Automation has been occurring for centuries.

And yet we have more jobs and a higher standard of living than ever.

Sure some jobs get destroyed, but new ones replace them. "App developer" wasn't even a thing 15 years ago, and now there are people not just making a living off this profession, but even becoming rich.

Just hard for me to get too worried about automation. The trend throughout history has been it making us wealthier and improving our lives, not the other way around.

>>131191510
The fear of automation leading to mass poverty is a bit shortsighted since if the majority of the population was out of work they would not be anyone able to purchase the products being made by the robots that replaced them. It would be a suicidal decision for any company to go fully automated. An economy cannot exist entirely based on only 1% of the population. That said automation for many current jobs is inevitable but any company that doesn't want to ruin themselves is going to hold back on it until some alternative means of labor or income is available to the masses, this might be in the form of a universal basic income which could potentially be even more disastrous.

>>131197361
What is? What are you going to do when millions of people are not only unemployed but unemployable.

Serious answers please. Not "hurr let them starve durrr".

>>131197263
Neodymium, hydrochloiric acid, possibly a nuclear source to keep it powered for more than an hour, titanium for small components, etc etc. Haven't you noticed that the "garage inventor" died out a century ago?

>>131197331
>I mean even the most basic jobs of maintenance could be theoretically performed by machines.
The word you're looking for is hypothetically because we have no theories that say you can make something like that.

>Computers keep getting faster
No, computers are getting more dense by adding smaller transistors. They have not gotten past the 5ghz mark in base clock production models.

>People right now are needed for maintenance and installation in a mostly automated factory.
And they will be desperately needed to maintain far more complex robots, which is a cost you have to add to the robot's "living expenses"

>Eventually none of the human touch will be necessary when we can 3d print an entire factory cheaper than you can pay union John and his alcoholic buddies to do it.
But that's not actually possible.

>>131197654
Uber is going out of business because it pursued that mistaken rhetoric. Google has already given up on its self-driving cars.

>>131192409
>the cotton gin will destroy the market for slavery

>>131197415
doubt it, my dad doesnt work in factories anymore. and the ones he worked in were manufacturing
>>131197835
oh but universal basic income will fix this, people can just be lazy welfare nigger their whole lives

>>131191510
I like how commies always seem to think that with automation they could get their communist utopia but sadly for them it will inevitably turn into a dystopia, just think about it
>Be commie
>Be in a time where automation has completly replaced humans
>give all the means of production to a centralised authority rhinking "it will fade away all by itself"
>Leader doesn't give a shit and enslaves everyone
>be slave for the eternity of our life

>>131198010
>the concorde will kill subsonic commuter travel.

>>131198010
>the zeppelin airship is the most reliable form of travel possible

>>131197854
Why would they become unemployable?
Just create a craft that they can find employment in, just like the industrial revolution did for all those farmers.
Their labour is still a resource worth investing in, you don't need to keep them content with UBI.

>>131197957
Uber is going out of business? That's news to me.

Even if that's true it proves nothing.

How many people do you think failed to construct an aircraft before the Wright brothers finally got it right? Those people in Silicon Valley will get there eventually.

>>131198010
>by the year 2000, 100,000 people will live and work on the moon

>>131197164
You think those machines just run endlessly on their own forever huh? No one does a thing in that factory? You are continuing to put your ignorance on display. Although I don't work in vehicle manufacturing let me tell you some jobs that I can see in that picture.

Maintenance, this will be a big one here. Those robots do a very high activity job and hydraulics will wear out pretty much at random. To keep production up they will regularly be replacing those as well as other parts in the system.

Monitoring, this one is a little more self explanatory but someone is going to have to be part of an emergency response team in case of a system failure.

Materials, a lot of fucking stuff needs to be fed into these machines. It's going to take a lot of aluminum, a lot of steel, a lot of grease. Probably a lot of gas too for the welders (depending on how they weld).

Electricians are going to be all over this fucking place too, this is high energy work and every failure, every install, every upgrade is going to take a skilled tradesman to fix. As demand changes the factory will need to change in size and production rates. Modern factories don't do that on their own.

Stop talking out of your stupid ass there are literal fuck tons of jobs in factories

>>131197855
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2r9U4wkjcc
I have no doubt that there will still be an economy I simply believe that people will be radically less dependent on one another. Basically we are going back to being independent yeoman farmers only this time we have robots.

File: gliding_flight_wright_glider_kitty_hawk_nc-_1902-10459_a-s.jpg (67KB, 864x576px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 864x576px

>>131198010
>We expect to have colonies on mars by the late 1980's.

>>131198157
None. The wright's were the first ones ever to use a gasoline motor on their already proven gliders.

Singularitarians all have a flawed narrative of history that is the entire framework of their ideas.

>>131198140
Possible but the projection seems to be that a lot of unskilled workers are going to be made completely redundant by automation.

Look what happened when Thatcher closed down the coal mines.

What do you do when unemployment reaches 50%?

File: 1488288535638.jpg (43KB, 688x456px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 688x456px

>>131197452

>What's preventing you from starting your own business then? Or working as a freelancer/contractor?
Nothing. But don't be a unrealistic retard who ignores that there is zero way every person in our country can/will do that. When UBI comes around is everyone just going to start up their own business? I don't even know what point you're trying to make. Even if I started up my business how would I hire people with Obamacare/regulations that killed many small businesses?

>Being a wagecuck who depends on an employer for his income isn't much better than depending on the govt for it.
You have the freedom to choose your employer.

>>131198358
I don't know what that video was supposed to prove.

Nor do i see how your techno-feudalism will ever come to be.

>>131198101
The Concorde was an incredibly niche product with no point. Nobody needed to travel that quickly for that much.

Automation is ridiculously cheap.

>societal collapse from robots doing all work humans did before

yeah, no. Humans just need to work less and the state or companies provide more for free. The best society is a soviety with out work.

>>131198321
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lights_out_(manufacturing)
All of that can be reduced to a few people and then eventually replaced my machines. Having worked for many years as a maintenance technician on electrical and mechanical systems I can tell you that automating the field is very possible.

>>131198566
>The Concorde was an incredibly niche product with no point. Nobody needed to travel that quickly for that much.
Then we wouldn't have invented planes. We'd have just slowboated everywhere.

>Automation is ridiculously cheap.
Until it is cheaper than a dollar a day for the robot's operation and maintenance, humans are superior.

>>131196252
Depends on the department a lot of the times.
Do you just need to clock in and out of work orders? DOS-era shit is fine. Probably running on an XP or 95 machine.

Do you need to print labels and shit for the warehouse guys to scan and put away? XP-era word document with a template.

Do you need to design blueprints? You're running XP at the absolute worst but probably running on 7 or 10.

Are you in IT? Then you're running a 7 or 10 with a dual-boot into a linux machine and using virtual machines to allow for compatibility with older software and doing touchups to the network and server hardware hodgepodged together over decades before anyone came up with the idea for there to be an IT Department.

>>131198321
If it cost as much labour to maintain the machines as it did to hire workers to do their jobs then there would be no point.

I'm sure a handful of engineers can maintain a fleet of robots the same way that IT support works in a typical company.

>>131198359
I'm pretty sure people had been trying to build aircraft since the Renaissance.

>>131198663
>Having worked for many years as a maintenance technician on electrical and mechanical systems I can tell you that automating the field is very possible.

Good thing your opinion amounts to nothing.

>>131198510
>Nor do i see how your techno-feudalism will ever come to be.
Because participating in the economy to get the things you want will become mostly unnecessary.

>>131198441
>You have the freedom to choose your employer.
Not if you don't have skills. You have to take what you can get. Do you think a low skilled worker with a family to feed can just quit his job if he feels like it?

He's just as dependant on his employer as he would be on the govt under UBI.

>>131198756
>I'm pretty sure people had been trying to build aircraft since the Renaissance.
So your argument is that we know as little about electricity now as the people back then knew about aerodynamics?

Well maybe you do. But what you are saying is that mankind should be able to fly by flapping his arms because we've surmounted every other challenge that people said was impossible.

>>131197855
You are correct I meant hypothetically! I guess we are gonna have to wait and see how this whole thing rolls out.

I find it hard to believe though that we would reach a point where no humans are necessary but I really don't want to call it impossible. If we continue advancing at a moderately similar rate it seems to me humans will have to learn to do more and more complicated jobs as we produce more complicated products.

>>131196934
These tired old rebuttals to this idea.

"When cars were made everyone said buggy makers would be put out of business.. they just learned to also make cars!.. It's ok goy."

What you don't realize is it wasn't replacing the delivery man, or the buggy maker, it was replacing the buggy and the ice. A better question.. how many fucking horses do you see now a days? How many 2'x2' blocks of ice in your house? Ai and automation replaces people... Those jobs don't transition, they disappear, and it will be a slow process, but lets not pretend it's not already underway. Problems are on the horizon, one of our biggest economic sectors is right in the cross-hairs. What happens when millions in transportation see their only remaining prospect being maintaining and repairing their own replacements.

>>131198853
>Because participating in the economy to get the things you want will become mostly unnecessary.
Oh. So we need UBI so we can get automation, but we can only get UBI if we already have total automation.

Makes perfect sense.

>>131198408
Create employment.
The service industry is immense and will only continue to grow.
There will proportionately be more elderly people, and you don't need a degree to organise a bingo.

Besides creating employment, you can 'lower' the cost of living by abolishing and lowering some taxes. When people keep more, they don't have to work as much or as often.
Maybe sometime in the future you can work at a factory for a week, then the second team pulls a week, then the third team, then the fourth team, and after a month has gone by you work your week shift again. Who knows.

The important thing is not to yield to the temptation of communism. Where there's a will, there's a way.

>>131198790
https://blog.openai.com/robots-that-learn/
Are you trolling me or do you really not see what's coming?

>>131198981
No. My argument is that just because we haven't perfected driverless cars yet, doesn't mean we won't in the future.

Fucking hell how many times did scientists fail to put a rocket into space before they got it right? To a layman like me that seems like a greater feat than driverless cars.

You're saying that it's a lost cause just because Google's prototypes didn't work as intended?

>>131199097
What I said is the complete opposite of UBI or dependency on some central body. When AI is advanced enough for total automation their is no reason for you to depend on anything but your own robots.

>>131199148
Who's going to 'create employement' though?

Capitalism is about generating profit, not creating employment.

>>131198998
>If we continue advancing at a moderately similar rate it seems to me humans will have to learn to do more and more complicated jobs as we produce more complicated products.

But we won't because proper humans average out at 100IQ, which is why having the sum of human knowledge in your pocket has not made cell-phone enthusiast societies more knowledgeable than the people who lived before the printing press. At least those people could actually recite what they knew and wouldn't have to check Wikipedia to jog their atrophied memories.

How many books have you read this year?

What happened with the introduction of the combine harvester and the tractor?

What happened to the blacksmith industry with the introduction of the motor car?

What happened with the introduction of the weaving loom?

What happened to the postal letter service with the introduction of email?

What's happening to the shopping malls with the introduction of the Internet?

>>131199345
The people will.
There are still niches to be found where demand will be great enough to allow a living wage to employees.

>>131196640
>It took 3.8 billion years for us to evolve.
I acknowledge this. What relevance does it have to the discussion at hand?

>A dollar a day
Human workers do not spring up out of the ground one day. It takes at least 12 years to get a human to the stage where they are able to do menial labor for an entire day. Double that if you want skilled labor. If you think raising, feeding, and educating a human laborer for a quarter of a century before he is able to perform complex and specialized tasks is "efficient", you are retarded.

>We can't predict the future so you predict that in the future computers will be better?
We already covered how long evolution took to get us where we are today. Look how long it took to get us from a room-sized machine that could do basic mathematical operations to a box-sized machine that could out-diagnose a panel of physicians. If you don't see a difference in the speed of intelligence progression, you are either retarded or willfully ignorant.

>obviously we are near the top
Of machine intelligence? No.

>Moore's law is already dead
Good thing Moore's Law has nothing to do with machine intelligence. If you had any formal education other than reddit you'd know that.

>At 100x the cost
>all businesses are sweatshops that use 60 IQ workers to function
Stop pretending like you know anything about economics, it's painfully transparent.

>>131191510
>that it would kill small businesses, create a bunch of impoverished welfare states, and and lead to a complete economic and societal collapse


THATS WHAT THEY WANT

>>131198663
Today that is absolutely not possible in the majority of factories as a cheaper alternative to human beings. Lights out manufacturing only works on very very basic products and even then it's dependent on what you make. Some of the shit we produce requires humans to regularly maintain because maintenance robots don't exist. As a former employee doing just that you should know better.

>>131196143
>robots cutting edges and becoming more efficient in their duties
>bluepill

>>131198031
I didn't say that a UBI was a good thing I thought that the word "disastrous"made that clear you fucking tard.
No a universal basic income would likely cause the whole species to stagnate and die off.
A more optimistic scenario is that full automation of labor would be the result of the job market shifting into a new frontier like what the industrial revolutions did.
Maybe into space?

>>131199613
What people? The millions who have just been made redundant by automation?

Do you think that if someone loses their job that they are likely to have an epiphany and start their own business or something?

We're talking about low skilled, low education and probably low IQ people here. I'm not so sure...

Or do you mean that companies will give them jobs out of "charity", in which case I'd like to refer you to my earlier statement that capitalism is about profit, not charity.

>>131199338
>When AI is advanced enough for total automation their is no reason for you to depend on anything but your own robots.
AI doesn't make robots any less expensive to manufacture and operate.
>>131199228
>No. My argument is that just because we haven't perfected driverless cars yet, doesn't mean we won't in the future.
Ah, god of the gaps. That's not a good look, imo.

>Fucking hell how many times did scientists fail to put a rocket into space before they got it right?
Zero. They had it right the whole time, physics-wise. It was manufacturing materials that could withstand the tremendous energies and forces that was the underlying issue, and making a good enough fuel. Same with the Wright Brothers. The principles of aerodynamics had all been long worked out and understood by the time the wrights USED THEM to make their Gliders. Then they had no choice but to wait for someone to make the Gasoline Engine because the Butane engines had too low a TWR to get the glider off the ground.

That is the issue with robots too. We're waiting for a sufficient power source and electric motors that will make them cheap enough, but we know SO MUCH about electricity and thermodynamics now that we've largely given up looking any more. There are no more gaps to explore. Gasoline is 14,000 times more energy dense than the best batteries. That's why all the big robots you see made by Boston Dynamics were gas-powered.

>>131191510
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=camNEJe6zEk

>>131191510
>Whats the big deal?
Those robots are taking those mens jobs by force.

>>131198056
>slave
>all labor is automated
So you would be a slave in name only?

>>131196143
I think you misunderstand what The Singularity is. It's simply the point at which the collective computational power of machines exceeds that of humans.

>>131199779
>maintenance robots don't exist
https://blog.openai.com/robots-that-learn/
I don't think we need any further advancements in computer technology to implement a small auto with two or three arms that can go around and do simple maintenance tasks and things are only going to get better as people work on them. In fact if I had the capital that's exactly what I would jump into.

>>131199916
But you could argue that with driverless cars it's just a matter of ironing out the kinks. We have most of it down. The motion sensors, collision detection systems, etc...

What's even the issue with driverless cars? Saftey I presume?

>>131191510
Honestly, something scary will happen, when only a minority will be able to earn living.

>>131199916
>AI doesn't make robots any less expensive to manufacture and operate.
Yes it does.

>>131199858
Yes, precisely. Those most in need become the most inventive/creative to earn a buck.
Some will go mad with rage, others will succumb to the sensation of incompetence and off themselves, but in the end there will be a few who manage to construct a solution that works for as many people as possible.
Remember:
Not all lowly educated people have low IQ.
Now all low skilled people have low IQ.

>>131199400
How many books? I'm afraid that books aren't really necessary for the most part in my field. The only books I've read this year other than George Orwell's 1984 are build manuals for new products, guides to maintaining new products, explanations of different kinds of electrical work, msds information, safety manuals etc. I have to read a lot but not really a lot of books. More technical things to be honest.

It's true what you say about average intelligence, it's very very hard to find an employee who is capable of this kind of work. Seems like most young people now want to be professional snapchatters

>>131200403
>Yes, precisely. Those most in need become the most inventive/creative to earn a buck.
Do you honestly believe that the people on minimum wage are going to get laid off work and suddenly become innovators and entrepreneurs?

I mean holy fuck mate I admire your optimism but you have to admit that that's not going to happen. Ever. Most of them will be fucked.

>>131198946

Yes being stupid limits your options but the vast majority of people have that luxury to choose still. And if you're that stupid and low skilled there's a good chance that you're now competing for less jobs with other low skilled foreigners that just flooded the country. UBI will only work with closed, regulated borders in a preferably ethnically homogeneous country (at the very least a country with a unifying principle/national pride).

You aren't as dependent on your employer as you are the government. Just because you don't have the skills doesn't mean you don't have the freedom. You can work wherever and for whoever you choose too. It's irrelevant if you choose to settle. You as an individual can vote for the government providing the UBI, but there are millions of individuals voting as well you have to factor in. You might not get what you want. When it come to employment, ultimately you the individual and only you the individual has control.

Sure, you're getting a paycheck in both scenarios. But the bigger point is to not give the government anymore control over your personal life than is necessary. Especially when it's fact that they abuse those powers. The government does not take care of you, it simply provides an environment for you to take care of yourself. Businesses have the freedom to start up and choose who they hire and you have the freedom to apply to work in any profession at any business/start up your own.

They are different.

>>131199815
>believing in something saving us from ourselves
>red pill

>>131199662
>I acknowledge this. What relevance does it have to the discussion at hand?
You said we depended on very recent technological logistics. We do not and it took billions of years for a machine as efficient as us to come about.

>Human... retarded.
12 years is 4,380 days so 4,380 dollars to raise the kid. You find me a robot that does the work of a man all day long and has an MSRP of 4,380 dollars and i'll eat a boot.

>Look how long it took to get us from a room-sized machine that could do basic mathematical operations to a box-sized machine that could out-diagnose a panel of physicians. If you don't see a difference in the speed of intelligence progression, you are either retarded or willfully ignorant.
I didn't say anything about the robot's ability to think. Tell me, why are gasoline motors only 30% efficient when they've been around for more than a century now?

How do explain a complete lack of progress in one domain and a vast amount in another with a single principle like exponential technology? Because a sigmoid curve would apply to both. There was a lot of wiggle room in computing, there is not a lot of wiggle room in energy. That's how the world works. You cannot compare the two.

>Of machine intelligence? No.
That you have no way of knowing the limits of? Fucking lol, you act like you're from the future.

>Good thing Moore's Law has nothing to do with machine intelligence.
Oh, you sad cuck. "Save me, machines!" what a father complex you have.

>all businesses are sweatshops that use 60 IQ workers to function
>Stop pretending like you know anything about economics, it's painfully transparent.
Says the person who cries that cost doesn't matter as long as it makes the world look like your sci fi cartoons.

>>131200270
The problem is that you would have to make an endlessly complicated robot for maintenance, your average human can climb up 30 ft into struts and fix an electrical issue and then climb down and reinstall a pipe that was leaking. You would have to have a robot that is adapted physically as well as mentally if it was learning to do these jobs.

>>131200767
>Yes being stupid limits your options but the vast majority of people have that luxury to choose still.
I don't think it has as much to do with being smart as it does with being financially stable.

For example I can always quit my job and my family will support me while I look for something else but what about people who don't have that luxury?

>The government does not take care of you, it simply provides an environment for you to take care of yourself.
I'd argue the opposite. Govt is there to look after the people. Companies are there to make a profit.

Now before you call me a commie or whatever, keep in mind that I'm a pro free market capitalism. I'm just saying that for a lot of people, UBI is identical if not PREFERABLE to wage slavery.

>>131200797
>implying I don't advocate for robot servitude
What
If we give them power they WILL turn against us

>>131200685
It's said over and over and over again.
First things must get worse before they get better.
People currently on minimum wage need not work as hard as someone used to when items we now consider bog-standard like radios and computers were luxury commodities.

Back during the industrial revolution, people were worried the poor farmers wouldn't be able to cope with all their children flocking to the city instead of working on the farm.
Then a few people invented some farm machinery, and their work has never been easier, as well as more productive.
Turns out they weren't so fucked after all.

File: 35136516849684561684.png (66KB, 776x246px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 776x246px

>>131200136
It's specifically the notion that we will create a literal deus ex machina that will solve every problem humanity ever has from then on.

It's childish at best.

>>131200364
>What's even the issue with driverless cars? Saftey I presume?
Cost, Computing power, Ethics. Mostly cost.

>>131200402
>magic god AI

>>131200426
So having the sum of human knowledge in your pocket is a gimmick at best?

>It's true what you say about average intelligence, it's very very hard to find an employee who is capable of this kind of work. Seems like most young people now want to be professional snapchatters
Pic related.

>>131199497

>What happened to the blacksmith industry with the introduction of the motor car?

It's become a bit of a niche nowadays.

>>131201263
>white guilt 2.0

Oh em gee i am laffin.

>>131191510
Unfortunately it is inevitable, assuming that AI really can become sentient. This is why I don't criticize socialist economics that much, because I believe that capitalism has a very limited future. Socialism will most likely prevail in the age of automation.

>>131200835
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVlhMGQgDkY
That's a good point but I the more I read these AI papers the more I think it can be done. I don't know how many years or decades it will take for society to implement these things but I do believe in their potential. In any case I don't think there is any fundamental work left to do in robotics save for energy efficiency. The only limit right now is in AI and if we continue making breakthroughs at this pace the future will be unrecognizable.

>>131201410
>wanting to enslave robots is guilt
What kind of word game is thus

>>131191510
Automation engineer here
>automation has been going on for years. How do you think your food / cars / water / pharmaceuticals are made?
>Will it put people out of work? Yes, it will and does. Will this cause some kind of catastrophe? No, did the tractor cause one? Did the automated production line? People adjust and find new work, its rough for them but it happens.

>>131201495
>enslave
Emancipate your PC and stop posting.

>>131201278
The main difference between this and the industrial revolution is that the jobs aren't simply moving from the countryside to the cities, they're disappearing entirely.

I really don't see how automation won't result in a large net rise in unemployment. I could be wrong though. We'll find out sooner or later.

>>131201443
>save me, robot stalin!

>>131201563
Nuuh
It's mine

>>131201410
>>131201495
I can't wait for the human x robot cuckold porn.

CYBORGED.com

>>131201342
>>magic god AI
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-21/how-just-14-people-make-500-000-tons-of-steel-a-year-in-austria
You can find similar stories in virtually every major industry.

File: download (8).jpg (9KB, 277x182px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 277x182px

>>131201751
It already exists.

It's called Overwatch.

>>131201751
Wasn't there an Israeli that kept posting robo-porn?

>>131201869
What is up with that game? It seems that in every SJW writes about it in their dating profiles.

>>131201828
Okay let's settle this. What's the difference between a robot and a tool?

>>131191510
Automation is a hundred year old meme started by Karl Marx and is unsupported by actual data

>>131201997
A robot is a tool. Unlike UBI advocates I simply believe that individuals will own and live by their own tools. Automation is potentially a one way ticket to individual independence from the collective.

>>131201960
It's a leftist skinner box. People are kept playing by giving them rewards at random intervals, so they play constantly.

It also pairs people up based on their skill in a psychologically abusive way. They say that the game has fair matchmaking that will always pair teams of roughly equal skill.

This is a lie. The game will pair you with teams below your team's skill levels for 3-4 games, then it will intentionally pair you with teams that are way above your skill level for 2-3 more games, then back to the easier ones. This creates a superiority complex and sets you up to become addicted to always becoming better, even though you're probably better than 90% of the other people in the game.

It's operant conditioning. It's the lone factor in Blizzard's success as a game company. They perfected it in WoW.

>>131202229
Conversely, is a tool a robot?

>>131202229
Why would a company rent robot labor from someone else when they can just own the robots themselves?

>>131201926
Yeah i remember that.
>>131202229
Humans are tools as well. You take away someone usefulness and the collective will kill you.
>Be born in robot age
>Chopped and ground up for medical use

>>131201960
Blizzard wanted to make money by creating a shitty TF2 clone, and they did this by changing the characters from funny, lovable and diverse in a normal way (different nationalities working together) with a bunch of closet lesbians, shemale dykes, faggots, edgelords and various other SJW templates. Naturally, the left lapped it up. It's a shitty game that is pretty much the aborted child of call of duty and TF2

>>131202475
>Why would a company rent robot labor from someone else when they can just own the robots themselves?
There won't be a "company" because the means of production will belong to the individual. You won't need to trade with anyone save for land and basic resources.

>>131202605
>You take away someone usefulness and the collective will kill you.
The collective will die along side our mutual interdependence.

>>131201236

>I don't think it has as much to do with being smart as it does with being financially stable.
Being smart has it's advantages when it comes to being financially stable. Of course it doesn't have everything to do with it but it's not unrelated. And there could be a million different reasons why someone might be financially unstable but that doesn't refute my point.

>I can always quit my job and my family will support me while I look for something else but what about people who don't have that luxury?
Sure, you could. And not everyone has a family but that's life. No one is born equal and will receive equal opportunities. But you're also implying that we don't have basic safety nets as well, when we do.

>I'd argue the opposite. Govt is there to look after the people.
Name one successful commie/welfare state. With UBI you remove incentives to work. It's literally welfare on a massive scale. Look what welfare has done to the nigger community. UBI is redistributed through taxes but how do you pay for UBI if no one is working? Where do suggest we get the money for it? Printing more money?

>Companies are there to make a profit.
Yes, but they also work off of the basic principle of supply and demand. They only make a profit when their goods and services are in demand. Those goods and services are possible via employees that help make/distribute.

>Now before you call me a commie
You dirty commie rat.

>UBI is identical if not PREFERABLE to wage slavery.
UBI is (((wage slavery))) run by the government that you have even less control over.

>>131194653

Actually it's the opposite. People trust robots more to not make mistakes.

>>131203180
Luckily UBI will become worthless as the technology matures as people will no longer have any reason to exchange anything with one another.

>>131191510
Who manufactures the machines? Who programs the machines? Who maintains the machines?

>>131202921
>There won't be a "company" because the means of production will belong to the individual. You won't need to trade with anyone save for land and basic resources.
You communists really won't be satisfied until another hundred million starve to death.

>>131203208
Got a source for that?

>>131195530
>t.retard
>this is exactly why people voted for trump. millions saw their jobs disappear under obama, clinton, and bush and get replaced by robots and foreign labor.

The only retard here is you, or any other dumbass that think Republicans are FOR MUH WORKING MAN

Nobody saw Jobs disappear under Obama and Clinton, as the facts PROVE job growth under them. Bush jobs did go down because of the financial collapse.

Ask yourself Trumpcuck, would a wall on the Mexican border patrolled by cameras and drones increase border security jobs or decrease them?

All the companies from Ford, Boeing and Carrier that Trump claimed would bring back jobs are taking the tax cut he gave them and moving anywhere.

Don't be a fucking moron. Trickle down economics is designed to destroy the Middle Class and always as been. By it's nature it makes the rich richer, their cup runneth over and it "Trickles down."

Enjoy poverty.

>>131203512
>You communists really won't be satisfied until another hundred million starve to death.
I'm an individualist not a communists. Humans will live like micro-nations supported by their AI.

Will the stock market still exist if UBI is implemented? I feel like that would be the only way for the average person to grow their wealth.

>>131191510
>Not at all.
We'll be gassing the bottom 20% of the population by then... in automated extermination camps.
I see no problem... nor anything of value that will be lost.

>>131203506
A technician. Which leaves 90% of people useless eaters.

>>131203854
>Starvation is too slow.
You need to think bigger.

>>131203506

Other machines. Just do some googling and learn yourself about redundancy in computing.

>>131191758
>if i close my eyes it won't happen

>>131204229
>useless eaters
They already are.
We could off them any time we please. It's just a matter of will.
When it becomes a matter of necessity, we already have both the technology and the transport infrastructure.
We merely lack the opportunity.

>>131204146
>>131204290
What are you going on about? The only reason you would starve to death is if you don't order your robots to farm your land and you exhaust your food supply.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r0CiLBM1o8

Video is kind of gay but it gets the point across.

>>131204823
What are you whining about, flesh-kind?

Some us want the population to reduce by design...

>>131204146
>We'll be gassing
>says increasingly useless NEET who's going to get gassed

>>131203506
The problem is that there'll be a net fall of the number of employed. STEM will see an increase but everything else will fall. The employment market will be thrown into chaos as millions upon millions of middle aged average joes get thrown on the street and become unemployable as they have to fight with better qualified newer generation for an ever more specified and shrunk employment opportunities.

>>131205008
Why?

>>131204630
They are already killing us man. Just out of sight so we dont revolt. The cancer surge is a big tell and the changes to education, ect ect. It goes on and on. Robots will just be a force the masses cannot contest. I mean drones. Can you imagine swarms of drones just murdering.

File: 1491776713289.png (509KB, 683x720px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 683x720px

>>131195502
>jews
>working

File: tmp_19715-nuclear_war.jpg?resize=900%2C450.cf-645321752.jpg (55KB, 800x400px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 800x400px

>>131194000
>you can't turn back the clock pal
I beg to differ

>>131206183
>jews
>not working
>what's a kibbutz

File: 1470125148655.jpg (66KB, 650x650px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 650x650px

>>131191510

Automation means further enslavement. There's really nothing any of you can do about it.

All the talk of UBI, AI controlled vehicles, automation leads us into Agenda 21. Your movement will be controlled, what you consume, where you're allowed to live.

The reason is that the western world is built on the logical fallacy of infinite growth. With the current global population it would take multiple earths to bring the writhing mass of humanity to western standards of living. This will simply never come to pass as resources become more scare.

There is a total consolidation of power coming, absolute control for a world of absolutes. The only absolution you will have is what forms of entertainment and infinite propaganda that are provided.

>>131191510
Kys degenerate commie

>>131205383
Humans are raping this planet clean. The most obvious tell is you have immigration from africa and middle east to europe. The planet is fucked.

>>131193727
> Israel aberation

How surprising

>>131191510

faggots like you are the reason we arn't on mars already

how about we not halt human progress AND not pay fucking welfare and let the superfluous niggers die..

>>131191510
It's going to be pretty neat, essentially the machinery will take care of humanity to a large degree. It's nothing but good in the long run, a lot of faggots here are just scaremongering as usual.

>>131191510
Why would there be impoverishment if much of the automation would be owned by nations themselves and it would be taxed appropriately.

This confuses me... are you sure you are not on some ideological high and thinking in terms of some obsolete system of government?

>>131204325
And what happens with the money?

If an employer chooses machines over workers, it means that machines are cheaper than workers. Which means that the product gets cheaper too, so the consumer spends less money on that product and has more money left. What do they do with that money? Do they throw it away?

Of course they don't. They spend that money on something else, thus creating demand, thus creating jobs.

>>131206380
>what's a kibbutz

what's a failing economic model fulla jew hippies that require muh six gorillion feels dollars from western christians to survive?

>>131206789
You arent being honest with history. You have to look back at the building blocks of this world to see doom is upon the 90%. The worst thing you can do is stay ignorant.

>>131206457
Whaa whaa i is scared p please s stop using m motorized carriages they are of satan!

Grow the fuck up, humanity will prevail, and whatever we do our children will laugh at our folly as we do to the idiots who hounded Mr. Germ.

>>131207290
Its not the technology you should be afraid of its the people who use them. You are right humanity will prevail but you wont have a say in who lives or dies.

>>131207265
How about you explain what you mean yankee instead of asserting things like a good little puppy you are?

The elimination of jobs is a natural part of economy. The less people are needed to do something, the better.

>>131207290

I am anything but frightened, I am absolutely looking forward to the turmoil surrounding such changes.

I would suggest you grow up and grow past believing that humanity can escape hard set limits on what this planet can provide.

Even if you had access to an infinite supply of energy it does not solve things such as phosphorus running out and a collapse of fishing stocks. The world of the future is far less free than most anyone wants to accept.

>>131207477
I am in no way scared of companies and people who drive industry in my country. They are like any other, problems come in when some soulless corporation created by perverse nature of Unites States comes by to fuck things up.

Luckily our politicians both domestic and abroad are stamping down on them with regulations. And NOONE on this board have ever had a say on who lives and who dies... that is always been in hands of the great clusterfuck we call humanity.

>>131207525
Understand there are people who rule this planet for one. People who treat us like pawns in a game. Now go read up on the various wars and collapse of civilizations which millions of people suffered at their hands.
>>131207895
No its not the corporations you should be worried about its the bankers.

>>131207725
Humanity does not need to escape any hard set limits as that cannot be done. But many of those 'limits' are set by idiots without vision. Humanity will ADAPT and Prosper in face of problems.

As for freedoms? To a lot of people freedoms are like pearls for the pigs, they do not see what they mean and how precious they are. I am VERY content that humanity will get past most of the problems, and that me, my kin, my community, country and its allies both close and more distant can meet ANY problem and come stronger for it.

>>131208223
Yeah you are one of those delusional idiots who want to see forces in play which make sense. Not the inherent chaos in the system.

As for bankers? Eh maybe, they do have power, but much of that power is also in hands of politicions in any civilized country. Banks can be made to heel.

>>131191758
You mean, like those threads bashing chinks, nigs, sandnigs, mexicans, poor whites, nordics, etc? Don't you have much more work to do on Twitter and Facefuck? It's saturday, so don't let those people say what they THINK, God knows what could come out of people DISCUSSING like thinking beings.

Oscar Wilde thought the advantages of the automated world would be humans dedicating much more time to their studies and creative activities. But no, it will help humans improve in nothing, absolutely fucking nothing.

>>131207895
That's because you're probably a simpleton.

You don't get it, do you? It's not going to be government-owned companies that produce the means for automation, but some ex-SF startup like Uber.

Besides, what do you think is going to happen in the mean time, when 50% of the populace is out of a job because they've been automated away? It's not that there won't be ANY jobs, there'll be plenty, but people with sub-102 IQ are unable to qualify to do them? We're going to have an underclass, while the working people will have more money than ever before. What do you think is going to happen then?

It's already happening in the States, and there's a huge opiate abuse epidemic among the working class because of it. If only we'd be so lucky so that the poor and the stupid would sedate themselves.

>>131207725
>Even if you had access to an infinite supply of energy it does not solve things such as phosphorus running out and a collapse of fishing stocks.
What do you think infinite energy means?
>protip: what matter is made of

>>131208821
>
Oscar Wilde thought the advantages of the automated world would be humans dedicating much more time to their studies and creative activities. But no, it will help humans improve in nothing, absolutely fucking nothing.

So quotes a man as he sees state of the West, with its works of literature and mass entertainment... reaping the benefits of automatzation.

On INTERNET... the current pinnacle of human communication, which relies on automation.

>>131208720
>thinking politicians control banks and not vice versa
Oh, sweetie... this is an 18+ board.

>>131208720
Hah no from the moment we left our tribes for civilization and started trading with each other he who controls money controls the world. All wars are bankers wars. All politicians are puppets knowingly or unknowingly to the banking elite. The great united states are slaves to this system.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByFfzMORXSM
The only free nations i believe are Iran, china and north korea and those nations are governed via dictatorship.
And this explains our relationship to those nations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfEBupAeo4

>>131191510
/v/ is always wrong

>>131209519
Internet relies on erasing history.

>>131209170
The same thing that happened when we got past the "90% of people must farm or we will all starve" state of existence?

People will adapt, make new things and invent new things to do and live goes on as usual. And take your 'IQ charts' and shove them in your ass. Modern society and people getting employed has very little to do with IQ as most of the competition is all about other attributes and connections you have.

You do not need to be smart to be in succesfull position which is not prone to automatization. And people will find new things to do... funny thing about humanity is that they do not really care how usefull they are and if they are left to wallow in squalor they WILL fuck things up. And i hate to sound more red than i really am but that mass of humanity WILL find a new deal and way of living, no matter how much some people who yearn for some "Beautiful and logical society" would object.

>>131209590
>The only free nations i believe are Iran, china and north korea and those nations are governed via dictatorship.
thats what we thought before wikileaks and snowden leaks

File: 0514cea719461a8231949b7a175c48d5cbefb6-wm.jpg (81KB, 640x920px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 640x920px

>>131191510
fuck off you communist scum

>>131209543
*Bites*

>>131209785
Radishes are growing under a tree.

>>131210685
Yeah? What did those sources uncover?

>>131192031
>2) Start limiting reproduction by basis of IQ and usefulness to society

i really like when shit like this gets posted. you guys realize that you are not the ones who gonna pass this test right?

>inb4 muh stem

>>131210553
>90% of people must farm
I think we are heading for an advanced society where 99% of people farm and manufacture everything themselves using technology.

File: iq-jobs.jpg (197KB, 512x921px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 512x921px

>>131210553
>The same thing that happened when we got past the "90% of people must farm or we will all starve" state of existence?
That analogy makes no sense. They moved onto doing something else people needed. Now there won't be any (for the masses).


>And take your 'IQ charts' and shove them in your ass. Modern society and people getting employed has very little to do with IQ as most of the competition is all about other attributes and connections you have.
This is pants-on-head retarded and factually incorrect. IQ is by far the number one predictor of life outcome.

>You do not need to be smart to be in succesfull position which is not prone to automatization.
Name five. You can't or have a retarded idea of what automatization can ultimately do.

>funny thing about humanity is that they do not really care how usefull they are and
>if they are left to wallow in squalor they WILL fuck things up
Literally my point. In a capitalist society they will be left in squalor because they are useless.

>And i hate to sound more red than i really am but that mass of humanity WILL find a new deal and way of living
Just because you keep saying it over and over doesn't make it so. You're burying your head in the sand.

>>131211417
That certainly is one of the paths future might take, why do we need industrial complexes if any random person could fabricate for him or herself full self-sustaining agriculture set for pittance and just come pick random food he wants every now and then.

>>131211417
Yep that's called "fully automated luxury communism" and it's pretty much the final stage of capitalism (which is good, but we must let it happen naturally)

>>131197957
>Google has already given up on its self-driving cars.
Quite the contrary.
https://www.wired.com/2017/04/googles-finally-offering-rides-self-driving-minivans/

>>131191510
It's never going to happen the way that delusional "MUH ROBOTS" and "MUH FUTURE AND SCIENCE" fags think it will. It will almost certainly be a factor in fast food and production lines, but other than that, it is science fiction fantasy.

>>131197345
lel you dumb faggot. check out how tesla is building cars. thats a little taste of future. they have only 3k people in their factory. and take a good look at the kind of jobs that are left.

>>131197957
>literally making shit up

>>131211860
>5 vans may at some point in the possibly near future drive passengers automatically
Oh shit watch out lads, the robots are coming

>>131191939
A bunch of the people in the 1937 picture are actually moorish descended black folks. We wuz nazis.

>>131211557
>That analogy makes no sense. They moved onto doing something else people needed. Now there won't be any (for the masses).

Then they move to do other things which people consider being worthwhile pursuits. They do not NEED to be and likely wont be anything which seems useful to us.

>This is pants-on-head retarded and factually incorrect. IQ is by far the number one predictor of life outcome.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2015/09/16/is-iq-a-predictor-of-success/#3e63dfd73604

Too many people dance around the totempole of IQ and think themselves wise.


>You do not need to be smart to be in succesfull position which is not prone to automatization.

Priest, Social Welfare personnel, Soldier, Scientist and politician.

>Literally my point. In a capitalist society they will be left in squalor because they are useless.

People care little about labels when it comes to such things, if capitalism cannot provide then capitalistic model will fail. Hell maybe we will trace back and go for feudalism?

>Just because you keep saying it over and over doesn't make it so. You're burying your head in the sand.

Just because you state something does not make it true, you cannot deny that humans have always found a way forward.

>>131212161
guys like you made fun of Benz when he strolled by in his Motorkutsche. google how that went

>>131200797
>You find me a robot that does the work of a man all day long and has an MSRP of 4,380 dollars and i'll eat a boot.

Find me a twelve year old that does the work of a man and isn't doing something retarded simple and easily automated like working a hand-pump first.

Automation and outsourcing to naan eating darkies is already killing jobs.

>>131192409
>>131192418
>hey if we look at the past and look for similar but not the same situations, we can predict the future
Wrong.

Industrial revolution automatized simple physical labour. That was fucking nothing. Automatization will automatize your intellect. Your fine motor skills. There's nothing that you can do that a sufficiently advanced AI-robot can not do.

>>131191510
Sooner we automate away ALL jobs the better.

File: consideryuri.jpg (78KB, 522x401px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 522x401px

>>131213197
This

We will automate doctors, engineers and coders. Hell, we have already automated some of their aspects. Its a matter of time before these jobs will be automated as a whole. Smart people too will be unemployable as software develops.

>>131213197
This is true, so we must ascend with them.

>>131212739
I'm not sure what you read in that Forbes article, but it's basically politically correctly pussy-footing around the fact that with a low IQ, you're fucked.

>Too many people dance around the totempole of IQ and think themselves wise.
It is the number one predictor of future outcome. I'm sorry, it is a fact.

>Priest
Yeah, because collectivism through religion is totally coming back.
>Social Welfare personnel
Granted.
>Soldier
Yeah, this is the job for masses in the post-scarcity utopia.
>Scientist and politician
Really? You don't need to be smart to be a successful scientist? Or a politician for that matter? You're fucking retarded, son.

>if capitalism cannot provide then capitalistic model will fail.
That sounds like a smooth transition. You omit the tiny part where the entire Western civilization falls. That's my main concern, not your completely fictional utopia that's not even based in reality.

>>131212161
>500 Chrysler Pacifica minivans to the 100 already roaming the roads
At 1,000 autonomous cars in any given city traditional taxis are going to go under. Right now the big players in this field are learning but that won't last as competition heats up.

>>131213658
Thank you, finally someone with half a brain. I'm worried about the breaking point though, it's gonna get rough when half the population is out of a job and we have to deal with the IQ question.

>>131213806
You do not need to be smart for many of the studies, you need to me methodical and able to adapt to things and write a consise report on the study.

Innovation and brilliance needs high IQ, peer-review for example does not always need such things. If you think there are no scientists who are not smart you are living in some coocoo land or have been watching too much TV.

Could be western civilization will fall, but then again it has endured much and many of its even darker moments have been filled with things people find noble, even is misguided.

>>131213658
A key thing that people who claim "my job is impossible to automate" don't get is that their jobs don't have to be fully automated to get fucked. All that needs to happen is that automation gets good enough that the job becomes idiot proof and then they can draw from the huge stagnant pool of out of work idiots to fill it. Forcing you into direct competition with every low IQ migrant on the face of the earth.

>haha but I speak _____ which puts me at an advantage over foreigners
"para espanol oprima numero dos"
They just have to change the interface and your advantage is gone.

>>131214360
>You do not need to be smart for many of the studies
>goes on to describe things that require intelligence, most effectively measured in IQ

>Innovation and brilliance needs high IQ, peer-review for example does not always need such things. If you think there are no scientists who are not smart you are living in some coocoo land or have been watching too much TV.
What you're saying is plain pants-on-head retarded.

I can come up with three theories as to why that is, and here they are, in descending order of likelihood
>1) you've never been to uni and you basically know science from grade school and youtube
>2) you're incorrectly conflating things like social skills and oratory skills with high IQ
>3) you are smart and think everyone else is too, and that in fact being smart is not a thing

File: consider the explosion.png (591KB, 943x720px) Image search: [Google]

591KB, 943x720px

>>131214072
In all honestly, IQ doesnt count here, at all.

For example, a lawyer or anyone highup in finance requires high IQ according to your chart. Yet these fields are most prone to automatization as theyre highly oriented towards paperwork. Its extremely easy for a bot to replace you in these fields ergo its already happening as many money managers are getting the boot

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-20/robots-are-eating-money-managers-lunch

Doctors too require high IQ but human diagnoses are prone to errors. Bots will have none of these and they see complex patterns between thousands of patients, ergo some aspects of doctoring is already automated.

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-38717928

Ergo we see that its not the IQ that deems a job impossible for an AI. On other hand nurses and social workers will not be outdone by AI as AI cant handle the social interaction with humans. Even if it did humans wouldnt prefer AI over their own species nor can the AI do any heavy lifting associated with social work.

File: iq87-98.png (441KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

441KB, 1920x1080px

>>131215214
>For example, a lawyer or anyone highup in finance requires high IQ according to your chart. Yet these fields are most prone to automatization as theyre highly oriented towards paperwork.
Were you to look at the top end of the chart, you'd notice the frequency of jobs that relatively easy to automate increases. So what you're saying
>In all honestly, IQ doesnt count here, at all.
is demonstrably false.

>Bots will have none of these and they see complex patterns between thousands of patients, ergo some aspects of doctoring is already automated.
Some aspects but not the job. There's a difference.

>Ergo we see that its not the IQ that deems a job impossible for an AI. On other hand nurses and social workers will not be outdone by AI as AI cant handle the social interaction with humans.
It seems you're cherry-picking like hell. Here's another list, IQ-related see how many non-automatable jobs you see.

>>131215214
>Even if it did humans wouldnt prefer AI over their own species
I would rather get my health care from a t-800 than an African American. The best part of automation is getting away from other people.

>>131215152
Well i cannot really say much about your theories, but you really seem to have no idea what research is all about.

Much of it is intense, needs you to adapt and be on point. But most of it is borish repetition of things until something works, does not work, or reacts in some odd ways which cannot be accounted for and THAT is the moment you need to start thinking and need higher IQ.

"Why the fuck does it keep giving X when it should be Y! Fucking thing sucks..." This is something that might herald scientific breakthrough if explained... or be just a glitch. And people doing it does not need to be smart, just honest, methodical and able to write the stuff down so it can be repeated and re-tested untill it is figured out what is it all about. This does NOT take smarts.

As for social sciences much of the same applies, you can analyze and grind forward. You will not be expectional but you do not need always be... you will see correlations, yo ucan calculate the things with % of certainty and form explanations which will be challenged by other studies... and things are learned.

And in PERFECT WORLS all of this would be peer-reviewed and re-tested in many places but nowdays noone really wants to do so... it is boring, has no money and no glory in it. This is why a lot of crappy science is left out there to fester. Anyway i am rambling... YOU DO NOT NEED TO BE SMART TO BE SCIENTIST AS MOST OF IT IS DEDICATION AND GRIND! (And hopefully honesty.)

>>131191510
Automation go against the basic capitalism, you need working people to buy goods and make the economy active.

Automation is inevitable.

Guys talking about automation being communism make me chuckle, because the only way automation could be stopped would be with widespread unionism....

Automation is only employed where it creates efficiencies. Where it creates efficiency, it creates a competitive advantage.

Therefore, automation wins in a free market.

The thing that puzzles me, is that 99% of all "notable" people in western history are people who would otherwise have been "Idle Rich". Discovery and progress is discovered by time-rich people who have the resources to "play" with their interests.

>>131214526
The financial crisis killed that sector's jobs because not only did it force the too big to fail survivors to trim overhead, they got a huge public sector cash infusion to do so.

One major profession that was essentially destroyed was proprietary trading. Huge trading floors were trimmed down (but not eliminated) with the rise of quantitative trading (or machine/computer trading, which is a misnomer).

Back in the day, one senior trader orders dozens of his underlings to execute trades. As time went on, those at the decision making top stayed, buy the underlings were replaced by a few programmers coding the executable orders.

http://dealbreaker.com/2016/09/ubs-stamford-trading-floor/

And everything in finance that is being outsourced will one day be automated, it's only a matter of time.

If this is happening to the most (((jewish))) sector in the economy, nothing is safe.

>>131216332
>Well i cannot really say much about your theories
>tl;dr you've never been to uni and are talking out of your ass

>but you really seem to have no idea what research is all about
But I do know because I've been to uni. The only way you get to do research is by passing a 50+ of courses not half of which a person with low IQ could even pass.

File: 107ff64dcd3cd3a04247fe28d93f0b6f.jpg (100KB, 736x515px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 736x515px

"But we have everything we need in life. We have reached the pinnacle. Everyone has their role, and wants for nothing. If we do not toil in the fields for 12 hours, we will just see the proliferation of degeneracy."

Nobody mourns the wheat thresher.

>>131217077
Yeah, and you passing those courses makes you oh so special snowflake? With dedication, several failures and a lot of work 90% of humanity would pass those courses eventually.

Please try to step down from your perceived position of superiority.

>>131217200
See
>>131213197
It's not the same this time, you absolute retard.
Then see
>>131216469
Which is the problem having too many people unemployed.

>>131191758
Agreed
Slide threads and commie b.s. thread represent 90% of pol, cant wait for summer to end

>>131214526
>A key thing that people who claim "my job is impossible to automate" don't get is that their jobs don't have to be fully automated to get fucked. All that needs to happen is that automation gets good enough that the job becomes idiot proof

Not even idiot proof. We've already had automation happening in "high end" jobs for years. Lawyers no longer need as many clerks, because there are computers and programs. Accountants no longer need a sea of assistants because there are computers and programs. Doctors no longer need a horde of secretaries and nurses, because there are computers and programs.

Familiar refrain.

I don't think people understand how much jobs were created through paperwork alone. Filing, finding, indexing, sorting, calendar maintenance, phone duties.. we've ALREADY cut this down to maybe 10% of what it used to be.

If your doctors and lawyers and accountants just get an order of magnitude better programs that automate 90% of what they do, we'll need less of them. It's that fucking simple.

It's not that you'll meet an android shrink or have a robot do surgery on you, it's just the redundancy of people is getting larger every year.

I don't get why it seems like you need to be a genius to figure out the end point of that civilization. These technological evangelists just claim "new jobs will be created". But we're already living in a world where there aren't enough jobs to keep us employed for a lifetime. Grandaddy's buying a house and staying with one job and raising a family on his own budget is gone, it's not coming back, and it's getting far worse every year.

We're living a dystopian nightmare in slowmotion and you idiots don't get it because you have an iPhone now, so things "must be better".

>>131217520
>Yeah, and you passing those courses makes you oh so special snowflake?
I don't, I really don't. I'm just being realistic about the future.

>With dedication, several failures and a lot of work 90% of humanity would pass those courses eventually.
This, my friend, is a lie we're told. We wuz all equal 'n shit... Does it not occur to you that there might be a reason why Africa is still a complete shithole? We left fully functional infrastructure there once, and now it's all gone to shit. Yes, it's the 20 points in average IQ.

And besides, who cares if say 50% could do it (which they can't) in 10 years what smart person does in 2?

>Please try to step down from your perceived position of superiority.
It's not perceived, and I'm on your side here. I'm looking out for you.