nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Automation: What do you think?

pangbang

Automation seems to be never mentioned in Ireland, and very rarely in mainstream media in any country. It seems like one of the 4 horses of the apocalypse galloping for us, yet nobodys really interested. Very strange.

Caught a headline on an article recently, stating that mcdonalds will be basically replacing 2'500 cashiers with technology by the end of the year. Just the tip of the mountainous iceberg heading for H.M.S Society. Heres an excerpt from the article:

McDonald's hits all-time high as Wall Street cheers replacement of cashiers with kiosks

Cowen says McDonald's will upgrade 2,500 restaurants to its "Experience of the Future" technology by year-end, which includes digital ordering kiosks.
The firm raises its rating on McDonald's to outperform from market perform and price target for the shares to $180 from $142.
Same store sales estimate for 2018 raised to 3 percent from 2 percent.

And how did investors react to the news? McDonalds shares rose.

To those feeling smug about not having to rely on retail jobs, you are

Next, and/or

Going to have to support the increasing numbers of unemployed, and/or

Going to fund the failing health systems that will be crushed beneath weight, and/or

lots more goodies!

So, two questions.

What do you think of automation in general, is it a doomsday clock or will it give you free time to masturbate while alternately fending for your life against the desperate hordes?

And secondly, do you think that the above problems of tax-take, infrastructural funding and so on will be answered by governments with.....more automation? ( Short-term thinking is rife, I think so)

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ToddyDoody

pangbang wrote: »

You want to know who the best customer is in the whole wide world? The customer you can extract the most money from? Its the customer that cant do jack-sh*t for themselves anymore, reduced to an emotional simpleton.

We're all more educated than ever before here though.

pangbang

ToddyDoody wrote: »

We're all more educated than ever before here though.

Oh I'd agree, no doubt. (How we use that education is another question, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing!)

But going forward, I can definitely see the potential for a dumbing down/eradication of education simply through lack of need, self-perpetuating.

There was a point where the junior cert was all you needed to get ahead. Then it was the leaving cert, then it was third level, now its probably master level...

Maybe its time for it to move in the other direction again.

Think of it like Gillette blades. "Wow its the best thing ever, TWO blades for a smoother shave!"....few years later...."Wow, its the best thing ever, THREE blades for a smoother shave!", .....few years later...."Wow, FOUR blades for a smoother shave!"

You know its going to go the other direction! "Wasting your time with 8 blades? Try our new, efficient 7 Blades!"....few years later...."Try our new and efficient 6 blades"....few years later...."Why waste your time with two blades, ours is just ONE super efficient blade!"

Admittedly, the education thing mightn't be advertised the same way :P

Senna

pangbang wrote: »

Senna wrote: »

I'm certainly not saying that all these low skill jobs will just be replaced one for one with new job, not a chance, there will be more jobs evolving and many are at the higher skilled levels.

I'm not too sure what you objection is, it's going to happen, wither you like it or not.[/QUOTE]

Well I suppose the bolded is both the question and the answer. I don't like the idea of replacement, and that's my objection.

But what do you think these new jobs will be exactly? Mechanics for the automatons? Engineers to build them? Programmers to code them?

My answer to those couple of examples is that they are at the forefront of replacement, just after retail-like jobs.

You might not like it, but short answer is tough.

Your question is far too symplictic, yes you will need all of them, but realistically we don't know what work people will be doing in the future.
If I explained to my mother what my job is in IT, she wouldn't understand one word. Likewise my daughter might come to me one day and I won't have a clue.

If you knew in 2017 what will be required in 2027,then you would be a rich person.

pangbang

Senna wrote: »

pangbang wrote: »

You might not like it, but short answer is tough.

Your question is far too symplictic, yes you will need all of them, but realistically we don't know what work people will be doing in the future.
If I explained to my mother what my job is in IT, she wouldn't understand one word. Likewise my daughter might come to me one day and I won't have a clue.

If you knew in 2017 what will be required in 2027,then you would be a rich person.

But I can realistically guess about the next 50 years. How many times has an intervention come out of the blue?

Can you think back over the last 50 years and see anything extraordinarily unexpected that happened?

The internet is basically the only big one, and even that is hardly a leap of logic, its just a multimedia dictionary in essence, and social media is the biggest non-thing that never happened. Except in negative ways, of course!

So, using simple logic, I see the next 10 to 50 years dominated by unemployment (based on the obvious nature of automation), immigration/emigration due to automation, global warming and a demonstrably, increasingly unequal society.

Its not hard to read the future. The problem in making money from predicting the future, as you mention, is that its hard to make money in a failing future. But then again I suppose if you aren't averse to immoral greed, then put your money in automation (but that also requires ignoring the cannibalistic, self-fulfilling prophecy you would be propagating. What good is money if the world is wrecked beyond recognition?

But be my guest if you can see opposite trends that I cant , I'd be happy in fact!

johnnyjb

What people don't realise is that different professions come and go, when's the last time you went to your local blacksmith?

Technology has created many jobs, you have people with no conceivable talent documenting their "exciting" lives via blogs etc...

At the end of the day companies need customers so if nobody has a job they can't buy anything

stimpson

I've been a software engineer for over 20 years. In that time I've been f?cked over countless times by project managers. I'm now in a job where I'm replacing PMs with scripts. They are quicker, make less mistakes and smell better than humans. I honestly couldn't give a fiddlers about the jobs. Learn a new skill if you're job's at risk.

Junkyard Tom

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Mg7qKstnPk

bazz26

Automation while seen as a necessary progression in today's fast moving world, I predict it will eventually be part of a catalyst for the human race to appreciate and learn the basic things that allow us to live all over again.

The world is heading for a full reboot I tell you.

pangbang

johnnyjb wrote: »

What people don't realise is that different professions come and go, when's the last time you went to your local blacksmith?

Technology has created many jobs, you have people with no conceivable talent documenting their "exciting" lives via blogs etc...

At the end of the day companies need customers so if nobody has a job they can't buy anything

That's the inherent problem with automation. You cant re-train to become a robot. The job is gone, full stop. And mentioning "Bloggers" as a job replacement is pretty weak (I know its only an example).

"I used to be a legal professional until a computer programme replaced 90% of my work, and me into the bargain. I now support my family by blogging about how to set-up a blog" :P

Of course you're right about needing customers, but do you think that companies will bring it to the point of disaster and beyond before recognising that?

bazz26

stimpson wrote: »

I've been a software engineer for over 20 years. In that time I've been f?cked over countless times by project managers. I'm now in a job where I'm replacing PMs with scripts. They are quicker, make less mistakes and smell better than humans. I honestly couldn't give a fiddlers about the jobs. Learn a new skill if you're job's at risk.

I'm developing code that will do away with the need for you to write scripts to replace project managers. Better start learning a new skill as your obsolete.

pangbang

stimpson wrote: »

I've been a software engineer for over 20 years. In that time I've been f?cked over countless times by project managers. I'm now in a job where I'm replacing PMs with scripts. They are quicker, make less mistakes and smell better than humans. I honestly couldn't give a fiddlers about the jobs. Learn a new skill if you're job's at risk.

Sure thing, all the crazy kids can re-skill to become a robot. Sure you see them up and down grafoton street, all you need is a bit of tin foil and arthritis.

mikeybrennan

McDonalds is hiring more cows in their burger section

it's not all bad

pangbang

bazz26 wrote: »

I'm developing code that will do away with the need for you to write scripts to replace project managers. Better start learning a new skill as your obsolete.

And that's the real problem.

Thankfully, I already designed a robot and programme that designed another robot that designed a programme to design a robot that will replace you, Bazz.

pangbang

Michael Tuohey wrote: »

I fix them. I'm a big fan. Go automation. (Automated systems break a lot) #neveridle.

I'm hardly going to listen to part of a cooling system about automation.

stimpson

pangbang wrote: »

Sure thing, all the crazy kids can re-skill to become a robot. Sure you see them up and down grafoton street, all you need is a bit of tin foil and arthritis.

There's plenty of things humans can do that can't be automated. Automation has been happening since the industrial revolution. Maybe you like to trade your car for a horse and cart?

pangbang

stimpson wrote: »

There's plenty of things humans can do that can't be automated. Automation has been happening since the industrial revolution. Maybe you like to trade your car for a horse and cart?

I'm not being facetious, but what is it that you think people can do that cant be automated? Just a few examples that could replace, say, a hundred million jobs, for starters.

Blogging? Art?

Yourself isit

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Any public/semi-state sector organisation that is unionised will fight automation tooth and nail. And Governments will back them to a degree.

The private sector will get it in the neck first.

Now...now...don't you know that Socialism has never been properly implemented. THAT's been the problem.

Given the option between socialism and mass unemployment under automation people will choose the former. What capitalism seems to forget is that every worker is a consumer. If company A loses a million workers then company B & C will lose that many again as consumer power decreases.

In the past unions for pay rises equal to productivity increases so it worked out. Without unions that won't happen.

That said I don't see automation as being as big a threat as futurologists say. If accountancy and medicine could be automated they would be already.

Yourself isit

bazz26 wrote: »

I'm developing code that will do away with the need for you to write scripts to replace project managers. Better start learning a new skill as your obsolete.

I wish you both understood your vs you're.

How can project managers be replaced by a script anyway?

bazz26

gctest50

Good example, just 14 instead of 1000 :

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-21/how-just-14-people-make-500-000-tons-of-steel-a-year-in-austria

The plant, a two-hour drive southwest of Vienna, will need just 14 employees to make 500,000 tons of robust steel wire a year—vs. as many as 1,000 in a mill with similar capacity built in the 1960s

stimpson

pangbang wrote: »

I'm not being facetious, but what is it that you think people can do that cant be automated? Just a few examples that could replace, say, a hundred million jobs, for starters.

Blogging? Art?

Here's a nice graph for you. Probably made by someone using a computer instead of a pencil and paper:

Yourself isit

gctest50 wrote: »

Good example, just 14 instead of 1000 :

That form of automation has been around in manufacturing for years.

I question replacing doctors though.

pangbang

Yourself isit wrote: »

Given the option between socialism and mass unemployment under automation people will choose the former. What capitalism seems to forget is that every worker is a consumer. If company A loses a million workers then company B & C will lose that many again as consumer power decreases.

In the past unions for pay rises equal to productivity increases so it worked out. Without unions that won't happen.

That said I don't see automation as being as big a threat as futurologists say. If accountancy and medicine could be automated they would be already.[/QUOTE]

Medicine is on the verge, in particular diagnosis and prescription. GP's are number one on the target list.

Funnily enough, accountancy, as boring and predictable as the image gives, is going to last longer than medicine. Maybe not much longer though.

Project management is doomed, as are a lot of management type positions.

The legal profession, a purposefully obtuse tangle of rules and regulations, is prime for replacement.

Personally, I'd say IT will see a drastic reduction in workforce. If a big chunk of them have to update their skills every month or so, then you can be damned sure they're in the firing line.

Its easy to think of manual labour as the first to go, but it could ironically survive much longer. You might still need a person to crawl into a hole and unplug some gunk, but processing a bunch of rules is easy peasy.

All round though they will share the same reduction in wages/increase in work for a majority.

Yourself isit

bazz26 wrote: »

Maybe the computers can help us to spell? Even fixing things as we type!

Yourself isit

pangbang wrote: »

Medicine is on the verge, in particular diagnosis and prescription. GP's are number one on the target list.

Funnily enough, accountancy, as boring and predictable as the image gives, is going to last longer than medicine. Maybe not much longer though.

Project management is doomed, as are a lot of management type positions.

The legal profession, a purposefully obtuse tangle of rules and regulations, is prime for replacement.

Personally, I'd say IT will see a drastic reduction in workforce. If a big chunk of them have to update their skills every month or so, then you can be damned sure they're in the firing line.

Its easy to think of manual labour as the first to go, but it could ironically survive much longer. You might still need a person to crawl into a hole and unplug some gunk, but processing a bunch of rules is easy peasy.

All round though they will share the same reduction in wages/increase in work for a majority.

Absolutely none of this is true. We could have replaced doctors with computers years ago if they could be replaced. I mean you can diagnose right now using the internet. It's not happening.

And software engineering isn't under threat from automation - it's going to be software engineers writing the automation.

Manual workers in factories will continue to be replaced. Outside factories manual workers are safe.

Automation of retail will be sporadic. Most people won't like it.

beauf

Yourself isit wrote: »

..How can project managers be replaced by a script anyway?

Have a random crazy idea generator. Work out how long it will take, and how much it will cost and divide by 2.

pangbang

stimpson wrote: »

Here's a nice graph for you. Probably made by someone using a computer instead of a pencil and paper:

You don't say! You mean nobody uses pencils and paper anymore? You must be joking. Or else you're insinuating technophobia to a person communicating on the internet via a computer.

But I didn't ask for the potential of certain jobs to be replaced, I asked you for examples of what could replace the replaced jobs.

Find a graph for that.

Or better yet, instead of finding files on the internet to prove anything you desire, how about common sense instead. Its far easier to share common sense, to examine it and critique it on a messageboard where people lose attention if theres more than a paragraph or two.

Yourself isit

pangbang wrote: »

You don't say! You mean nobody uses pencils and paper anymore? You must be joking. Or else you're insinuating technophobia to a person communicating on the internet via a computer.

But I didn't ask for the potential of certain jobs to be replaced, I asked you for examples of what could replace the replaced jobs.

Find a graph for that.

Or better yet, instead of finding files on the internet to prove anything you desire, how about common sense instead. Its far easier to share common sense, to examine it and critique it on a messageboard where people lose attention if theres more than a paragraph or two.

Is "common sense" just what you believe to be true. And you hardly write short posts yourself.

pangbang

Yourself isit wrote: »

Absolutely none of this is true. We could have replaced doctors with computers years ago if they could be replaced. I mean you can diagnose right now using the internet. It's not happening.

And software engineering isn't under threat from automation - it's going to be software engineers writing the automation.

Manual workers in factories will continue to be replaced. Outside factories manual workers are safe.

Automation of retail will be sporadic. Most people won't like it.

I could go digging on the internet for proof of what I say. But I can honestly tell you that I'm not going to.

I have read many credible resources that back up what I stated. Now if youre inclined to go looking, then good. If not, well then believe what you want.

About software engineers being replaced or not....why wouldn't they be replaced? Again, if you go looking, you'll find quite a bit about writing programme to automate writing programme. Its not some magical science, its mostly iterative code with slight alteration, so although you'll need the intuitiveness of a person to make those alterations, you wont need the guts of the workforce today.

Think about the point of automation. It is to make money, increase profit. Why would you not put considerable effort into replacing the only people that your system relies upon?

An example. A car manufacturer, it would be your first instinct back in the day that theres no way they will get rid of the people who build the product. And that instead the company would concentrate on getting their cars into every aspect of society. But the reality is that they did both at once.

What better business than the one that controls everything, and relies on nothing but itself? Its the very heart of automation.

beauf

Yourself isit wrote: »

Absolutely none of this is true. We could have replaced doctors with computers years ago if they could be replaced. I mean you can diagnose right now using the internet. It's not happening.

Its just taking time...

http://news.stanford.edu/2017/01/25/artificial-intelligence-used-identify-skin-cancer/

Yourself isit wrote: »

And software engineering isn't under threat from automation - it's going to be software engineers writing the automation. ...

I don't think you realise that a lot of manual work in IT is increasingly automated.