How /r9k/ deal with automatization?

>>38018766
by waiting for the problem to get so bad that the government has to start giving away money, because I'm not actually a member of the workforce yet.

option a: UBI
option b: get into a field that can't be automated yet

i've worked in alot of different jobs, and most of them I feel like I am only there because a robot cant yet do that particular task.

>>38018766
Im glad I fell foto the law school meme. Law wont be affected as much by automatization.
I feel bad for the people who fell for the medicines meme and engineering meme though.

>>38018766
I got a job outside innawoods. Considering modern robots can't turn a corner without becoming catastrophically unbalanced, I think I'll have enough time to get my career to a 'tenured' level before they are able to walk on wet, uneven, muddy, mossy ground.

Neet life inc.

But on a more serious note, studying bioeng and hobbies so I have something I enjoy if automation kills my job.

By being a programmer. I don't have to worry about this, for the next 30 years.

>>38018871
It will eventually lad, discovery is something that is already being automated.

Drafting legal documents and legal consultations can also be automated.

>>38018871
>Implying engineers and programmers aren't working achieve this goal in order to troll wage slaves and not have to work anymore

>>38018766
Accelerate it to the point that humans have to acknowledge currency is a sham and we live in a post scarcity society

>>38018869

Option b doesn't have much of a window of opportunity really, we can only plan for general improvements to technology we already know exists, so can only make at best educated guesses in terms of career path, and will be facing increasing competition as more people compete over a smaller pool of jobs. To make matters worse your position wouldn't be safe for long as more capital will get invested in obsoleting whatever job you're doing after the more conventional automated jobs get cleaned up.

So we're back to waiting for UBI.

>>38018941

what about flying drones? they don't have to walk at all.

>>38018869
I'm yet to see any workable way to pay for UBI from the marxists who love it so much

File: 1486706856142.png (132KB, 396x385px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 396x385px

By being the person who does the automating

Inb4 "you'll be automated too". The likelihood of that happening in the next 100 years is miniscule. Only uneducated retards who can't fathom the complexity of such a task say shit like that.

>>38020242

Tax automated production?

>deal
Nigger, I am the one who programs them. And I won't rest until we all get loyal qt 2D robo waifus.
That'll be the true automization, the roastpocalypse, the femobsolete happening.
Neural nets are so hard

File: mp,220x200,gloss,ffffff,t-pad,220x200,ffffff.3.jpg (10KB, 220x200px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 220x200px

When every job is automatized, will we finally be able to live in a communist Utopia?

>>38019179
Unfortunately this calls into question a few things. We only have x amount of resources and 2 people want it all. In a post scarcity society, we could create that resource out of thin air but we cannot with current technologies. Who will settle that debate? What if two people want to live on the same land? There are problems woth post scarcity that are really hard to overcome currently.

My profession is the oldest in the world. I'm a killer of men.
>inb4 terminators
stfu I'll kill a terminator too

File: Good Sister.jpg (153KB, 480x950px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 480x950px

>>38018766
We will either live in a dystonian oligarchy or a communist society if automation comes. Those are the only two options.

File: p6890_p_v8_aa.jpg (439KB, 960x1440px) Image search: [Google]

439KB, 960x1440px

>>38018871
im sorry to disappoint you but you should google ibm law machine and :
http://www.rossintelligence.com/

>>38019055
>implying Ping, Pajeet, or Pyotr won't take your programming job

>>38021950
I'm the one taking John's programming job.

Most jobs won't be replaced with automation in the next few decades. Only low skill jobs like cashiers and maybe taxi drivers.

>>38021913
Pretty much. We're setting ourselves up for technocracy though.

>>38018766
Have fewer kids. Invest wisely.

I'm programming NN right now. I'll be fine for the foreseeable future.
Most of the people I'd like to have jobs are fine too.

I suggest a major social reform to deal with it.
Execute anyone who doesn't pass with straight A's up until grade 9. Then we're pretty much sorted. It's not like we need all these people anyway.
If you have qualms about executing a lot of children just sterilize the low iq (sub 120) parts of the population.
Could be done secretly. People take whatever you give them today.

Other options include stepping down work hours drastically so brainlets get to share a few jobs. And just keep them around to keep them satisfied. I'm not sure we can afford such luxuries. It seems paradoxical that we'd be getting more cheap Labour through machines yet can't afford to keep low skill employment but if you look at the way our luxury goods would evolve having humans part of actual manufacture would be catastrophic. There's of course the option of giving these people fake jobs. I'm not sure that's sustainable.
>>38021913
>self-sufficient oligarchy and self-sufficient 'communism'
This is the exact same thing anon. There's no roads to that right now. People are too dumb to go to a peaceful society now.

Goddamn it this makes me almost gleeful. I want to fucking die and I will love watching society collapse as the workforce grows smaller, but things grow cheaper due to automation and before long the snake eats itself and the economy fucking collapses because not enough people are buying shit. Then we start gassing the under-100 IQs.

>>38023485
>If you have qualms about executing a lot of children just sterilize the low iq (sub 120) parts of the population.
Learn how IQs work, nigger

>>38023799
I know exactly how IQs work. I'm not looking to exterminate half of mankind like >>38023557
More is required. Sub 120 (approx.) is just too dumb to be bothered with.
If we went for sub 100IQ we'd clearly keep a lot of terrible people in the pool. The thing is that right now normal is pretty awful. It wouldn't be many generations of this before we have a utopia. In the long run its clearly a win for everyone. Smart people are more often happy. They're more productive and will lead mankind towards whatever goals we want.

If we just evolve without any culling we will have a horrible future.

>>38020242
Don't assume that all proponents of UBI are marxists.

I work in the field. Can't get replaced by a robot when you're the one servicing them :^)

By sitting at their 'pewters memeing 'bout how they've got this and presenting their opinions on the future as fact. They will never be loved as they are and lack the drive to do anything about it. The days will all seem the same until they die, wrong about everything.

kek @ witty faggots here who think their white collar and programming jobs won't be automated all the same.

I bet you think surgeons are irreplaceable too.

>>38023980
IQs are a normal distribution of the population, meaning the entire graph covers everyone, and the most common people are close at 100. 0 is the lowest, 200 is the highest. If you remove all the people under 70, then the people who were 70 become the new 0.

>>38024032
Until maintenance robots roll out eh senpai?

Looks like we're headed for full-on fully automated gay space communism. Thanks for doing your part, fuckwit.

>>38018766
Not my problem yet.
The day they can make a bucket truck self driving, able to work all on its own is at least 30+ years into the future.
Hell even now we linemen use drones to get into people's backyards with poles and that's not going to change anytime before my dope retirement from my cozy government job.

>>38021950
jokes on you i work with pajeet

>>38018766
If this ever goew full swing at my grocery job then im fucked.
Hopefully US gov. or atleast my union will do something about all this.

>>38018766
>t. masters in electrical engineering
future seems bright for me
>>38020262
Tell them my man. Normies think that if someone make brick laying robot today tomorrow we will have general purpose robots. Just not going to happen. Fuzzy neural networks in computer vision need ~30 years to get to the level of most retarded human and that is the part to just realize what the robot is really looking at. Trying to achieve human like interaction in analog world with today paradigm is fools effort yet everyone and his cat try that.

File: Church of Bezidu Nou.jpg (172KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1280x853px

>>38024837
your job is most likely going to be lost unfortunately. There was a study recently that looked into how retail companies were pursuing automation options which didn't look to hopeful. Ill try find it if you want.

At least you're not alone however, there are millions of others that will lose their jobs due to this rise of automation. This might be a real opportunity to establish socialism, but we have to 'capitalise' on it.

>>38024402
Yes. Exactly. That's why we need to keep at it.
If it wasn't a normal distribution then we could just have one cleansing and be done with it.