The beginning of the end for taxi drivers

Billy86 · 20-08-2016 08:20PM

El Hombre wrote: »

In fact I wonder may it get to a stage where there might be an international treaty signed to limit autonomous tech due to large scale society breakdown?

That represents the same problem though of trying to stop progress to fit society, when what should and will happen is society evolving to fit progress.

Chuchote · 20-08-2016 10:23PM

Billy86 wrote: »

That represents the same problem though of trying to stop progress to fit society, when what should and will happen is society evolving to fit progress.

Medieval laws enforced daylight-only working; at curfew (couvre-feu) it was illegal to keep on weaving or whatever, because it was unfair competition.

Iwasfrozen · 20-08-2016 10:34PM

starshine1234 wrote: »

How would that wipe out jobs?

Tax is taken at the very end, after all expenses have been paid.

What difference does it make to the company if they pay 10% tax, or 50% tax?

It's all profit.

Should society be allowed to fail because of this argument?

Umm it matters a lot to shareholders!

I also matters to companies who fonr lie being taken over by more successful competitors based in another country.

alb · 31-08-2016 06:24PM

alb wrote: »

Cars will be able to communicate with other cars, you may not need traffic lights at all if the cars can negotiate order at junctions between themselves.

Quoting myself from back in post #97, as CGP Grey just made a new 5 minute video about what causes traffic and how self driving cars would change it:

Chuchote · 31-08-2016 06:35PM

This excellent video (in the post above) shows exactly why a 30km/h speed limit makes cars transit the city faster.

alb · 01-09-2016 12:12PM

More news relevant to this thread. Self driving buses are going into use for a month on public roads in Helsinki and for use by the general public. If you still think autonomous vehicles are pie-in-the-sky sci-fi have a read of this:

http://www.curbed.com/2016/8/31/12691516/self-driving-bus-vehicles-finland-helsinki-transportation

Also look at the size of them, not much bigger footprint than a car by the looks of them and they can carry up to 12 passengers.

eeguy · 01-09-2016 12:29PM

alb wrote: »

Also look at the size of them, not much bigger footprint than a car by the looks of them and they can carry up to 12 passengers.

That's the way to do it. No drivers means you can run more frequent smaller busses. Less congestion due to coordination.
Wonder how Finnish bus drivers are reacting this this.

josip · 20-09-2016 11:31AM

The US is legislating at a national level.
http://newatlas.com/white-house-us-government-policy-driverless-vehicles/45510/

Pepe LeFrits · 20-09-2016 11:47AM

bb1234567 wrote: »

I like the conversation with taxi drivers and want to support human jobs

... don't worry, you'll have the option to book the Uber self-driving limo with concierge.

Letree · 20-09-2016 11:55AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I find it funny how so many people regard automation as a bad thing. Obviously automation is replacing human labour - that's the whole point. The ideal end game is a scenario in which automation reduces the cost of living by so much that working hours across the board can be greatly reduced.

It only becomes a f*ck up if income inequality isn't tackled before the automation event horizon is reached.

I don't know, politicians and businesses seem wedded to this idea that they have to squeeze 40 hr week out of people.

jimgoose · 20-09-2016 12:06PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I find it funny how so many people regard automation as a bad thing. Obviously automation is replacing human labour - that's the whole point. The ideal end game is a scenario in which automation reduces the cost of living by so much that working hours across the board can be greatly reduced.

It only becomes a f*ck up if income inequality isn't tackled before the automation event horizon is reached.

Hmm. The Automation Event Horizon is defined, I believe, as that point at which the automation process is itself so automated and efficient as to be significantly cheaper than human workers for any desired task. So productivity soars and plentiness rules. So far, so Jim-dandy. But...

Currently a person's income is determined, broadly speaking and for the most part, by the value they add or are perceived to add via what they do for a living or otherwise. In a post-Event Horizon scenario, where the very notion of human labour is starting to look a bit "quaint", how then is income acquired, never mind the amount of it determined?

wes · 20-09-2016 12:20PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I find it funny how so many people regard automation as a bad thing. Obviously automation is replacing human labour - that's the whole point. The ideal end game is a scenario in which automation reduces the cost of living by so much that working hours across the board can be greatly reduced.

It only becomes a f*ck up if income inequality isn't tackled before the automation event horizon is reached.

I remember someone saying that automation is not the problem, but capitalism. Now, I am not communist, but I think the current economic system stop making sense, when you effectively automate most jobs out of existence.

Pepe LeFrits · 20-09-2016 12:33PM

I don't think total or near-total automation of the job market is anything anyone currently alive on this planet really needs to worry about.

What generally gets over-looked re: automation is that as it removes old jobs, it creates new ones. This isn't the first time automation has disrupted our society. Farming for example used to be an extremely labour-intensive industry, and then machinery came along. Society didn't collapse.

Taxi drivers may lose out initially but the savings that everyone else makes on transport redirects money into other parts of the economy that haven't been automated, thus increasing demand for services in those areas.

Harvey Normal · 20-09-2016 12:40PM

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

I don't think total or near-total automation of the job market is anything anyone currently alive on this planet really needs to worry about.

What generally gets over-looked re: automation is that as it removes old jobs, it creates new ones. This isn't the first time automation has disrupted our society. Farming for example used to be an extremely labour-intensive industry, and then machinery came along. Society didn't collapse.

Taxi drivers may lose out initially but the savings that everyone else makes on transport redirects money into other parts of the economy that haven't been automated, thus increasing demand for services in those areas.

That works up to a point. However we are told that most things will be automated or handled by AI. That leaves people paying for jobs that can only be handled by humans. Like What? Hugs?

Not that I believe that AI is imminent

jimgoose · 20-09-2016 12:58PM

wes wrote: »

I remember someone saying that automation is not the problem, but capitalism. Now, I am not communist, but I think the current economic system stop making sense, when you effectively automate most jobs out of existence.

Well, it does. In an era, seemingly, where the notion of going out to a week's work for a week's income is rendered ridiculous, what then is all this efficient, automated production for? What's the game? How is government funded when no-one has a personal income? Unless there will be some other form of personal income with which we are hitherto unversed, the old shit-show must either peter out and shut down, or else become some sort of Skynet setup, with humans demoted to scurrying around the periphery like so many giant hairless rats. :pac:

josip · 20-09-2016 01:06PM

200 years ago before automation nearly all jobs were essential apart from priests, nuns and a few artists.
Nowadays, many essential jobs are automated and a much larger percentage of 'jobs' are non essential jobs such as yoga teachers, interior designers and plastic surgeons.
As automation increases. more and more non-essential jobs will be found.

Life on this planet is a big game with constantly evolving rules.
For many on the planet, the objective of the game is to accumulate enough/as much wealth as possible by the end of the game.
The game provides mechanisms at various stages of its evolution for the accumulation/dispersal of this wealth.
Jobs and work in all their forms, are just one means of accumulation/dispersal to keep us occupied and entertained.

seamus · 20-09-2016 01:31PM

Harvey Normal wrote: »

That works up to a point. However we are told that most things will be automated or handled by AI. That leaves people paying for jobs that can only be handled by humans. Like What? Hugs?

Not that I believe that AI is imminent

There's a feedback loop here. Automation is driven by cost reduction, which is driven by profiteering.

If automation replaces job en masse, then we see a reduction in disposable income, companies see less sales, less profits.

Therefore it seems logical to conclude that as time progresses, something really odd is going to have to happen. Companies aren't going to be clever enough to spot it happening.

Minimum basic income will come in. Everyone receives a base income of X regardless of whether you work, and then those who do have a job receive a little more on top. As the numbers of people working drop, countries will become more reliant on tax revenue from companies and sales of natural resources.
You can of course continue taxing people on a minimum basic income, but there's a declining return since the government is paying that income in the first place. But that's only a stepping-stone - a stopgap solution to ensure a quality of life in a capitalist world that's profiteering itself out of existence.

Since less people will be buying products, companies profits start to suffer. And so government incomes start dropping. And we encounter this tipping point where something is practically free to produce - every step in your chain is automated, you just have to power it - but you can't sell it to anyone or the cost needs to be so low as to be practically meaningless.

Which means we may likely see the emergence of mega-corporations beyond anything we've ever seen. Companies for whom selling a communications device for €2 profit each makes sense because they're the only people who produce them and they sell 6 billion of them a year.

That and/or states taking over companies and just running everything. If the value of a service is so low as to be practically meaningless, nobody will provide it. So the state has to. Ultimately if everything is automated, the state doesn't really require an income to run anything. There would still be some inter-country trading taking place for resources, but hopefully the majority of countries would be merged into a single entity at that point anyway. What would be the point in borders?

Ush1 · 20-09-2016 03:25PM

seamus wrote: »

There's a feedback loop here. Automation is driven by cost reduction, which is driven by profiteering.

If automation replaces job en masse, then we see a reduction in disposable income, companies see less sales, less profits.

Therefore it seems logical to conclude that as time progresses, something really odd is going to have to happen. Companies aren't going to be clever enough to spot it happening.

Minimum basic income will come in. Everyone receives a base income of X regardless of whether you work, and then those who do have a job receive a little more on top. As the numbers of people working drop, countries will become more reliant on tax revenue from companies and sales of natural resources.
You can of course continue taxing people on a minimum basic income, but there's a declining return since the government is paying that income in the first place. But that's only a stepping-stone - a stopgap solution to ensure a quality of life in a capitalist world that's profiteering itself out of existence.

Since less people will be buying products, companies profits start to suffer. And so government incomes start dropping. And we encounter this tipping point where something is practically free to produce - every step in your chain is automated, you just have to power it - but you can't sell it to anyone or the cost needs to be so low as to be practically meaningless.

Which means we may likely see the emergence of mega-corporations beyond anything we've ever seen. Companies for whom selling a communications device for €2 profit each makes sense because they're the only people who produce them and they sell 6 billion of them a year.

That and/or states taking over companies and just running everything. If the value of a service is so low as to be practically meaningless, nobody will provide it. So the state has to. Ultimately if everything is automated, the state doesn't really require an income to run anything. There would still be some inter-country trading taking place for resources, but hopefully the majority of countries would be merged into a single entity at that point anyway. What would be the point in borders?

I think governments would step in long before that happens. They will try to retain jobs for humans through legislation.

I'm pretty sure that's happening already actually with the car industry in America.

irish_goat · 20-09-2016 03:27PM

I assume the automatic taxis will still inform you of which nationalities are to blame for the all the problems in Ireland today?

josip · 20-09-2016 03:32PM

Ush1 wrote: »

I think governments would step in long before that happens. They will try to retain jobs for humans through legislation.

I'm pretty sure that's happening already actually with the car industry in America.

Yes, governments will try to retain jobs for social stability, but not necessarily a particular job type.
Taxi driver will soon join the long list of obsolete job types such as bowling alley pinsetter, ice cutter, cooper, rat catcher, lamplighter, log driver, switchboard operator and knocker upper.
(Shamelessly borrowed from http://www.boredpanda.com/extinct-jobs/)

Ush1 · 20-09-2016 03:58PM

josip wrote: »

Yes, governments will try to retain jobs for social stability, but not necessarily a particular job type.
Taxi driver will soon join the long list of obsolete job types such as bowling alley pinsetter, ice cutter, cooper, rat catcher, lamplighter, log driver, switchboard operator and knocker upper.
(Shamelessly borrowed from http://www.boredpanda.com/extinct-jobs/)

He wasn't talking about a particular job type, he was talking about mass scale unemployment and no jobs for those people to do directly because of automation.

josip · 20-09-2016 06:31PM

Ush1 wrote: »

He wasn't talking about a particular job type, he was talking about mass scale unemployment and no jobs for those people to do directly because of automation.

This thread is about a particular job type.

Grayson · 20-09-2016 07:29PM

irish_goat wrote: »

I assume the automatic taxis will still inform you of which nationalities operating systems are to blame for the all the problems in Ireland today?

fixed your post.

Bloody linux drivers coming over here and taking our jobs.

seamus · 21-09-2016 09:30AM

Ush1 wrote: »

I think governments would step in long before that happens. They will try to retain jobs for humans through legislation.

I'm pretty sure that's happening already actually with the car industry in America.

Yeah, I don't know how well that will work either though. If country A starts putting a cap on automation but country B doesn't, country B gets the competitive advantage. Exports from country A become astronomically expensive in comparison. And in the modern world the ability to export is all-important; you can't stimulate economic growth selling stuff to yourself.

The car industry in the US has been bribing politicians for a few years now to try and hold back the likes of Tesla, but the money is now firmly flowing in the other direction and they're finding their anti-competitive practices being struck down in constitutional court.
Just this week the US issued its wholehearted support to automated vehicles including an formal policy and roadmap for the use of automated vehicles;
https://www.transportation.gov/AV

This document will likely form the basis of AV policy worldwide and with some surity around how to get an AV onto the road will definitely accelerate their uptake and development.

Maximus Alexander · 21-09-2016 11:25AM

The taxi drivers in this thread be like

"To place a man in a multi-stage rocket and project him into the controlling gravitational field of the moon where the passengers can make scientific observations, perhaps land alive, and then return to earth—all that constitutes a wild dream worthy of Jules Verne. I am bold enough to say that such a man-made voyage will never occur regardless of all future advances."

- Lee De Forest, 1957

Harvey Normal · 22-09-2016 09:09AM

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

The taxi drivers in this thread be like

"To place a man in a multi-stage rocket and project him into the controlling gravitational field of the moon where the passengers can make scientific observations, perhaps land alive, and then return to earth—all that constitutes a wild dream worthy of Jules Verne. I am bold enough to say that such a man-made voyage will never occur regardless of all future advances."

- Lee De Forest, 1957

Firstly because one person has been wrong about predicting future technology before doesn't mean that every single future technology is possible, technologically or economically.

Secondly not everybody who thinks this won't work are taxi drivers.

josip · 27-09-2016 10:33AM

As someone has already posted, mining companies have been leading the way with autonomous technology.
There is then a trickle down effect as this technology gradually makes its way into less restricted and finally mainstream driving environments.

I found this article interesting because it the first time I've seen an autonomous vehicle that doesn't contain some kind of cabin/seat for a driver/monitor.

http://newatlas.com/komatsu-autonomous-truck-mining/45627/

Ush1 · 27-09-2016 10:54AM

seamus wrote: »

Yeah, I don't know how well that will work either though. If country A starts putting a cap on automation but country B doesn't, country B gets the competitive advantage. Exports from country A become astronomically expensive in comparison. And in the modern world the ability to export is all-important; you can't stimulate economic growth selling stuff to yourself.

The car industry in the US has been bribing politicians for a few years now to try and hold back the likes of Tesla, but the money is now firmly flowing in the other direction and they're finding their anti-competitive practices being struck down in constitutional court.
Just this week the US issued its wholehearted support to automated vehicles including an formal policy and roadmap for the use of automated vehicles;
https://www.transportation.gov/AV

This document will likely form the basis of AV policy worldwide and with some surity around how to get an AV onto the road will definitely accelerate their uptake and development.

That's true but of course country B will see a huge rise in unemployment, less taxes being paid, etc etc...

The policies I was referring to was unions within the car industry have agreements to protect workers by specifiying machines can only do a certain percentage of the work, despite the fact the machines could actaully do everything.

I think automated cars will certainly crack on and be adopted, it's the whole no jobs for people thing I don't see coming to pass.

eeguy · 20-10-2016 01:47PM

josip wrote: »

As someone has already posted, mining companies have been leading the way with autonomous technology.
There is then a trickle down effect as this technology gradually makes its way into less restricted and finally mainstream driving environments.

I found this article interesting because it the first time I've seen an autonomous vehicle that doesn't contain some kind of cabin/seat for a driver/monitor.

http://newatlas.com/komatsu-autonomous-truck-mining/45627/

https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/blog/all-tesla-cars-being-produced-now-have-full-self-driving-hardware-0

So all Teslas are now equipped with full autonomous sensor suite.

The future is here people!

The beginning of the end for taxi drivers

Comments