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

Humans need not apply

sink

CPG Grey just posted a new video of which the basic summation is that we're on the verge of a major revolution in automation. Machines are reaching an apex at which they will out compete humans in as much as 45% of current jobs over the next 20 years and there will not be enough new economy jobs to replace them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

I currently work as a website administrator so I think i'm safe for a while. However if you're a taxi or truck driver, I would seriously recommend considering your options for the future.

Such monumental change is scary, however I think if it's managed right it could turn out very well on the other hand **** could go very badly wrong.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

House of Blaze

Not throwing a dig here Tail but just look at something like commercial airliners, which have mandatory autopilot installed by international law for aircraft above a certain passenger threshold. In some cases they are even equipped even to perform landing maneuvers automatically with next to no input from a pilot.

This is a law precisely because the autopilot is statistically safer than a manual pilot. And of course it's fairly common knowledge that air travel is far and away the safest form of travel.

I know you've made points about difficult surfaces and difficult conditions for trucks, but these systems are capable of dealing with all of the randomness of air currents, turbulence, wind, weather even lightning strikes.

Obviously there is a huge financial outlay in these systems for aircraft, but with cheapening technology and the continuously improving methods used to guide systems like these, I would say that if self driven cars are the way it's going to go then it's only a matter of time until trucks etc. follow.

kowloon

I'm okay with it as long as they provide facilities for all the people, like myself, that have no further use in society.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-vRpQ0YyYo

Tail Docker

House of Blaze wrote: »

Not throwing a dig here Tail but just look at something like commercial airliners, which have mandatory autopilot installed by international law for aircraft above a certain passenger threshold. In some cases they are even equipped even to perform landing maneuvers automatically with next to no input from a pilot.

This is a law precisely because the autopilot is statistically safer than a manual pilot. And of course it's fairly common knowledge that air travel is far and away the safest form of travel.

I know you've made points about difficult surfaces and difficult conditions for trucks, but these systems are capable of dealing with all of the randomness of air currents, turbulence, wind, weather even lightning strikes.

Obviously there is a huge financial outlay in these systems for aircraft, but with cheapening technology and the continuously improving methods used to guide systems like these, I would say that if self driven cars are the way it's going to go then it's only a matter of time until trucks etc. follow.

It's 70 million for a crap plane. It's 70k for a truck. There's one issue. Secondly, they fence off the runway and tend to keep muppets out of the flight-paths for a reason. The M50 would make crossing Ukrainian airspace look like a doddle. Not to mention four pallets of bricks going to Bohernabreena down a boreen.

stimpson

Tail Docker wrote: »

Sounds good on a screen. Getting insurance cover for a 40 ton agv out feral could be trickier. People would be falling over each other to get clipped by them and sue.

Volvo a self braking truck disagrees:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-giC24SxwE

Tail Docker

stimpson wrote: »

Volvo a self braking truck disagrees:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-giC24SxwE

Yeah, I mentioned anti-collision would be a big runner. Hence, we agree, which is fabulous. There's a few other such videos, which as Borat would say, were not such a great success.

stimpson

Tail Docker wrote: »

Yeah, I mentioned anti-collision would be a big runner. Hence, we agree, which is fabulous. There's a few other such videos, which as Borat would say, were not such a great success.

But that's version 1. Think what 20 years of development work would do. Remember how bad Windows 3.0 was?

Tail Docker

stimpson wrote: »

But that's version 1. Think what 20 years of development work would do. Remember how bad Windows 3.0 was?

Yeah, I'm going nowhere with windows 7 driving either. BTW, on that subject, driverless cars...whats the point of people being in them? Couldn't one just, erm, drive..or ar we all supposed to sit back, drool over x-factor and eat nacho chips with cheese dip?

Spook_ie

Holsten wrote: »

Gotta be sarcasm.

EVERY driving type job will be done by a computer in the near future, every single last one of them. Taxis, trucks, trains, ambulances, post, food delivery, everything.

It won't work the way its intended if you have humans to mess it up.

Hmmm, what was the old joke about Windows software and auto anything, oh yeah, If all else fails then CTL/ALT/DEL. would you really trust a computer?

Davarus Walrus

stimpson wrote: »

But that's version 1. Think what 20 years of development work would do. Remember how bad Windows 3.0 was?

10 years ago people were still playing snake on their Nokia phone. Elon Musk predicts autonomous vehicles will be publicly available by the end of the decade, with the potential for mass adoption within 10 years. He's also sending craft into space, so this lad is putting his considerable pot of money where his mouth is.

stimpson

Tail Docker wrote: »

Yeah, I'm going nowhere with windows 7 driving either. BTW, on that subject, driverless cars...whats the point of people being in them? Couldn't one just, erm, drive..or ar we all supposed to sit back, drool over x-factor and eat nacho chips with cheese dip?

But win7 doesn't crap itself 5 times a day.

The big win for driverless cars is taxis without the opinionated bull**** and casual racism.

CINCLANTFLT

An example... 70 years ago there was thousands of dockworkers unloading ships in sprawling docklands... now it is done by a few lads with some cranes in a relatively compact container port... I think these are the kind of changes to expect...

Tail Docker

CINCLANTFLT wrote: »

An example... 70 years ago there was thousands of dockworkers unloading ships in sprawling docklands... now it is done by a few lads with some cranes in a relatively compact container port... I think these are the kind of changes to expect...

True. Then a lad from Longford picks up the container and wends his way down to Westport where all the lads the docks let go empty the boxes out of the container.

Tail Docker

Davarus Walrus wrote: »

10 years ago people were still playing snake on their Nokia phone. Elon Musk predicts autonomous vehicles will be publicly available by the end of the decade, with the potential for mass adoption within 10 years. He's also sending craft into space, so this lad is putting his considerable pot of money where his mouth is.

Elon Musk wants to shoot people through tubes from place to place too. Which is a bloody good idea. But so is Crackeoin, a moreish combination of crack and heroin. To some. Richard Branson is also "putting people into space". Handy if you've a few mil sitting doing nothing, if the kids need to go to football, not so much.

PopePalpatine

I'm just wondering...if automation becomes as big as CGP Grey says it could be (in that it replaces at least 45% of the workforce), what do you do with those newly-redundant people? Would they have a right to survive that overrides the right of anyone who has shares in a company that benefits from automation to their dividends?

strobe

The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is clear: To build and maintain those robots.

Dravokivich

strobe wrote: »

The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is clear: To build and maintain those robots.

Sounds like an awful waste of money and resources, why not just play Call of Duty instead?

Tail Docker

Dravokivich wrote: »

Sounds like an awful waste of money and resources, why not just play Call of Duty instead?

There will always be some sneaky camper, queering the pitch. I reckon Putin would be a camper. He has that head on him.

PopePalpatine

Tail Docker wrote: »

There will always be some sneaky camper, queering the pitch. I reckon Putin would be a camper. He has that head on him.

Would Kim Jong-un be the annoying squeaker?

unkel

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I'm just wondering...if automation becomes as big as CGP Grey says it could be (in that it replaces at least 45% of the workforce), what do you do with those newly-redundant people?

It will be a very gradual process, taking many decades. Same as what happened during the industrial revolution. If it all means we have the same / a better standard of living but we'll only work 20h per week on average in 2064, what's not to like?

Dravokivich

unkel wrote: »

It will be a very gradual process, taking many decades. Same as what happened during the industrial revolution. If it all means we have the same / a better standard of living but we'll only work 20h per week on average in 2064, what's not to like?

I'll be 80. What's the point? :pac:

Tail Docker

unkel wrote: »

It will be a very gradual process, taking many decades. Same as what happened during the industrial revolution. If it all means we have the same / a better standard of living but we'll only work 20h per week on average in 2064, what's not to like?

You can feck right off with your 20 hours of work, slave driver.

unkel

Dravokivich wrote: »

I'll be 80. What's the point? :pac:

And I'll be dead. But maybe my children will enjoy it

Stheno

smash wrote: »

Robots will never be intelligent like humans. They will be able to solve problems faster than us, but only because they can process information faster than us, but only after we provide the information and parameters needed for them to do so. Just look up IMB Watson.

You mean IBMs Watson, which is already available for companies to use to replace low value call centres, and being programmed to do medical diagnosis a la House

Bigus wrote: »

Where's the paperless office so, we had that 20 years ago but it didn't work .

It'll be 100 years plus before we see this if ever.

.

I work in a paperless environment, regularly shift between five locations in a week, can't remember the last time I'd to print something.

shruikan2553

smash wrote: »

I'd hate for my self driving car to get a blue screen while doing 120 on a motorway.

I wouldnt worry too much. Car electronics are designed to have one of the, if not the lowest failure rates. If a part is prone to faults it tends to get messy.

PopePalpatine

unkel wrote: »

It will be a very gradual process, taking many decades. Same as what happened during the industrial revolution. If it all means we have the same / a better standard of living but we'll only work 20h per week on average in 2064, what's not to like?

I suppose it could end up like Marge in "You Only Move Twice", where you're so bored because everything's automated that you're driven to getting drunk on wine.

sink

unkel wrote: »

It will be a very gradual process, taking many decades. Same as what happened during the industrial revolution. If it all means we have the same / a better standard of living but we'll only work 20h per week on average in 2064, what's not to like?

I think it will happen a lot faster than you imagine. Like other digital technologies, the processing power and sensor fidelity required for general purpose automation are on an exponential growth curve, which means they double in power or half in cost over a period of time (usually estimated at 18 months with processing power). Meaning in just 10 years robots will be orders of magnitude more intelligent and perceptive.

Iwasfrozen

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Indeed. Perhaps a universal basic income is not such a bad idea after all.

Giving people a full wage for doing nothing? Yeah I'm going to go with a no on that one.

Iwasfrozen

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I'm just wondering...if automation becomes as big as CGP Grey says it could be (in that it replaces at least 45% of the workforce), what do you do with those newly-redundant people? Would they have a right to survive that overrides the right of anyone who has shares in a company that benefits from automation to their dividends?

As has been mentioned Guinness used to transport goods by boat on the liffey, there aren't scores of unemployed boat drivers in Dublin. Most jobs that people will work in 50 years time haven't been created yet.

unkel

sink wrote: »

I think it will happen a lot faster than you imagine.

I imagine it will happen very fast in some areas. For a start I'm thinking basic line assembly in China. Wages were extremely low a decade ago but now under severe pressure. How many people in China work at that, must be 10s of millions at least? Impact on Ireland will not be as fast and hard I'd think though. There's really not that much very simple unskilled manual labour in Ireland left

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Giving people a full wage for doing nothing? Yeah I'm going to go with a no on that one.

Not a full wage. A basic income. It's actually a beautiful system. Here's the base idea behind it: pay every single person in the state over 18 something like €200 per week into their bank account linked to their social security number. Then charge about 40% tax on every euro income anyone makes. No deductions / allowances, no welfare, no state pensions.

Iwasfrozen

unkel wrote: »

Not a full wage. A basic income. It's actually a beautiful system. Here's the base idea behind it: pay every single person in the state over 18 something like €200 per week into their bank account linked to their social security number. Then charge about 40% tax on every euro income anyone makes. No deductions / allowances, no welfare, no state pensions.

I get the idea but why not means test it? And taxing people who earn under 30k? You're also taking away things like free courses for unemployed people. It sounds like a far more regressive system than we have.