Reply to: Computers are the future. So why are we the enemy?

[Zero Liability]

BBC is also talking about half of all graduates are in scabby jobs, and are bemoaning the lack of quality career choices. So something doesn't stack up.

Could be the fact that, whatever glossy brochures unis might put out there, containing often questionable info regarding employment prospects and increased earning potential, not all unis and not all courses are made equal. I think it also has to do with the fact that an undergrad degree from the average uni means a lot less now than it used to.

[cojak]

BBC is also talking about half of all graduates are in scabby jobs, and are bemoaning the lack of quality career choices. So something doesn't stack up.

[NotAllThere]

BBC news this morning talking about the IT skills shortage.

[SueEllen]

UK governments think short term because that's what they think the voting population wants.

Individual MPs and ministers have long term views on a variety of issues but most will toe the party line unless the issue is one they feel passionate about.

Unfortunately there isn't one who feels passionate about technology.

[Elliegirl]

Governments are incapable of thinking long term and unfortunately us ordinary people have to deal with the consequences. I'm not even convinced that having a more diverse intake into parliament will go any way to solving the problem because the short termist problem will still remain. I think technology will continually move people to take more responsibility for their own futures rather than allow governments or employers to set the parameters. Some of my friends who don't get this are paying the consequences for thinking someone else is responsible for their future. I am generally preoccupied with thinking about how I can differentiate myself from the rest of society to keep my job for as long as possible, and technology has contributed to this in a way I couldn't have dreamt of 20 years ago. I can keep ahead of the game by adding to my skillset online. My job cannot be offshored (not with any success anyway, it's been tried!!) and yet it relies on a very good knowledge of technology. Computers, I am happy to say, are my friend.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Yes but when they implemented automated sewing a lot of people that were sewing manually died of starvation . Problem solved?
Don't have any references, watched it on discovery a while a go. Makes you think

That also happened to be a time where infant mortality rates plummeted, and population soared.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Well , thanks to industrial revolution and automation we have reduced working hours to 8h/pd and only 5days a week.
But what if theres no job, computers will take over all the aspects? Will 100% of people feel the benefit of it or just those that control them?

Everyone will - otherwise we wouldn't use the computers if it was more beneficial to do it manually.

I always find it a very odd idea to think that people would seek to obtain their products & services through some owner of a magic robot, even if it was beneficial to do it manually. I.e. just because a robot can do it, doesn't mean a man cannot do it too. If the man is cheaper/better, then why would anyone use the robot.
I.e. the potential for robots to do mens work will always be better, or at least neutral, for the consumer.

The controllers might benefit MORE, but that's all good and proper anyway. There will always be competition evening that out as time goes on too.

[SueEllen]

Any sensible person could see that if automation suddenly allowed work to be done in half the time, capitalism would lead not to everybody working for half the time, but half the people working full-time and half the people unemployed; and any sensible person could see that that is not right.

Your presumption is based on the fact that those who are "highly skilled" will be the ones working full-time, there as the utopian dreams presume that everyone can be "highly skilled" so no one will want to work more than their contemporaries.

There seems to be a shortage of sensible people in Westminster, because they are obsessed with the idea that The Market is not only the solution but is also the definition of the question.

Loads of those in Westminister come from the same or similar backgrounds so therefore they don't have different ideas.
This is why they are campaigns and complaints to get more diverse people in politics. Unfortunately the political model to get MPs and MEPs elected means you will only be chosen if you come from those backgrounds.

Offshoring is a completely different question.

Supposedly being attacked by HMG and HMRC is yet another. Personally I don't think we are being attacked - we are not big enough to be worth the bother - we are just inconvenient. We are collateral damage.

I agree with the last part which is why we need to align ourselves more with engineering than banking when complaining about HMRC's stance.

[expat]

Why do 'radical' politicians have so little to say about the future? - Telegraph

Computers are going to be putting more and more people out of work. Why isn't anyone in Westminster interested?

Odd then that more and more IT is being offshored and we are being attacked by government and their bosses HMRC.

Any sensible person could see that if automation suddenly allowed work to be done in half the time, capitalism would lead not to everybody working for half the time, but half the people working full-time and half the people unemployed; and any sensible person could see that that is not right. There seems to be a shortage of sensible people in Westminster, because they are obsessed with the idea that The Market is not only the solution but is also the definition of the question.

Offshoring is a completely different question.

Supposedly being attacked by HMG and HMRC is yet another. Personally I don't think we are being attacked - we are not big enough to be worth the bother - we are just inconvenient. We are collateral damage.

[MicrosoftBob]

Interesting topic...

IMHO, if societal complexity (read: services sector and associated jobs) continues to increase in the future, there is a chance that the number of new jobs created will exceed those that will be destroyed by better computers, software and robots.

However, weighing against this is the suggestion that there are already more humans on the planet than the carrying capacity of the Earth, given available resources, etc. Also, it's likely that society's feedstock energy sources are going to have a worse EROEI in future than they do currently - this is gonna bite us in the a$$ unless we can find new sources of energy.

Soylent Green ?

[alphadog]

Interesting topic...

IMHO, if societal complexity (read: services sector and associated jobs) continues to increase in the future, there is a chance that the number of new jobs created will exceed those that will be destroyed by better computers, software and robots.

However, weighing against this is the suggestion that there are already more humans on the planet than the carrying capacity of the Earth, given available resources, etc. Also, it's likely that society's feedstock energy sources are going to have a worse EROEI in future than they do currently - this is gonna bite us in the a$$ unless we can find new sources of energy.

[diseasex]

The main thing putting workers out of work in the so called "developed world" has not been, and is not, computers. Rather its the ever tighter anti-pollution regulations here which tends to force production to shut here and re-open in Indian and China where the same production lines run with much worse pollution than was ever the case here. Same with anti-pollution regime, and green taxes (heavily subsidised windmills etc), pushing the price of power up here, which forces production costs up here, and production again moves to India and China. So the developed worlds anti-pollution regimes have reduced jobs here massively and resulted in a net increase in world pollution, simply shifted it from here to other countries. Those same countries also run production with far less safety gear, making production cheaper than it would be here too. They also rarely pay for intellectual property they use, like software licences, or protected production techniques. We are not in a man versus machine competition, we are in a race to the bottom in terms of pollution, health and safety, intellectual property, and so on... we accept cheaper imports from countries which disregard these issues and seem happy with the cheaper goods. To say nothing of the child labour in some of these countries. In the IT biz its also been the movement of tasks and work offshore, cheapness over quality, and mass import of cheaper foreign workers from India.

actually I'm happy we don't have this:
Chinese Air Pollution Kills 4,000 People Each Day (And Why It Will Kill Many More) | Zero Hedge

[CoolCat]

The main thing putting workers out of work in the so called "developed world" has not been, and is not, computers. Rather its the ever tighter anti-pollution regulations here which tends to force production to shut here and re-open in Indian and China where the same production lines run with much worse pollution than was ever the case here. Same with anti-pollution regime, and green taxes (heavily subsidised windmills etc), pushing the price of power up here, which forces production costs up here, and production again moves to India and China. So the developed worlds anti-pollution regimes have reduced jobs here massively and resulted in a net increase in world pollution, simply shifted it from here to other countries. Those same countries also run production with far less safety gear, making production cheaper than it would be here too. They also rarely pay for intellectual property they use, like software licences, or protected production techniques. We are not in a man versus machine competition, we are in a race to the bottom in terms of pollution, health and safety, intellectual property, and so on... we accept cheaper imports from countries which disregard these issues and seem happy with the cheaper goods. To say nothing of the child labour in some of these countries. In the IT biz its also been the movement of tasks and work offshore, cheapness over quality, and mass import of cheaper foreign workers from India.

[pangeakiller]

Toyota pioneered automation and robotics. They had an awesome run for 8 years or so. People praised their LEAN manufacturing capabilities. Their quality, turn-out ratio and margins were top-notch thanks to automation. But then they had their f*** up moment with the un-intended acceleration issue. They hired 10 engineers and asked them to look at the car that had failed to stop. The humans were able to spot the design flaw within 30 minutes!

See that's were the world needs humans. Computers and Robots and drones are awesome and they can do what they are *programmed* to do quite well. In the absence of iRobot like moment or technological singularity, computers and other machines are just tools for humans. You learn to use the tools or you don't (lazy b**). When computers replaced type writers, several typists lost their jobs. However, some learnt to use computers for calendars and note taking and became highly paid secretaries. Briefly, there was a boom for secretaries who had these skills (along with other skills ). Now there is a boom in China for folks who can operate an electrical sewing machine (since those are expensive for common people)

[Antman]

I heard once that working hours got less and less, and leisure time more and more until it peaked in the early/mid 70s. After that, working hours started to gradually increase again.

I'd hope further automation would mean the world can move to 3 day weekends. However greed will probably prevent that.

Wasn't this some trend of firing half the workforce and paying the half who stayed a third more to work double the hours or summat?

Goes back to asahi lager