CDZ How Might We Soften The Blow of The Third Industrial Revolution, the Age of Robots?

[320 Years of History]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

All of your 'solutions' focus on one single thing: suppressing the change rather than actually addressing it. That is not a solution and will ultimately fail miserably. Resisting change (or even trying to slow it down) is not only pointless but very counterproductive.

One possible idea that has actually been floated around even in conservative think tanks has been a guaranteed basic income. Essentially a check that the government pays you for being a citizen. In a society with a super majority of needed goods, this idea actually makes a fair amount of sense as the incentive to get people to contribute is no longer a necessity.

We could even tie in some form of community service or such to receive this "basic income" even if it was just a couple hours a week volunteering to pick up trash or coach a kids' sports team, or whatever. Who could object to making that a requirement to receive this basic income, and if they did complain, cut them off, b/c no doubt no matter what system we use going forward, we can't have a situation where some people contribute nothing whilst earning the same as others who will. The problem with this of course is convincing liberals that they have to be tough at times. No one will starve, those who are currently doing nothing for their welfare would certainly do something for it if they had to, it just takes someone saying "no you can't have that for doing nothing" this of course excepts those who are incapable of doing so.

Red:
Though you didn't end your sentence with a question mark, I presume it is a question (rhetorical or otherwise). It's answer can be found here.

 

[FA_Q2]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

All of your 'solutions' focus on one single thing: suppressing the change rather than actually addressing it. That is not a solution and will ultimately fail miserably. Resisting change (or even trying to slow it down) is not only pointless but very counterproductive.

One possible idea that has actually been floated around even in conservative think tanks has been a guaranteed basic income. Essentially a check that the government pays you for being a citizen. In a society with a super majority of needed goods, this idea actually makes a fair amount of sense as the incentive to get people to contribute is no longer a necessity.

Well, perhaps I expressed myself poorly, but I am trying to generate ideas for channeling and softening the punch of the jobless economy and transitioning more easily to it.

There are different problems involved ehre, but I acknowledge that the technological change is 1) not going to be stopped, but perhaps we can slow some of it and give incentives to slowing the change so people can adapt and 2) it will be a technological utopia, pretty much, for those that manage to live to see it. But how can we get from here to there in one peace as a nation and as a people?

That is what I am trying to discuss instead of endless semantic squabbling over whether it is socialism to try and do anything about it at all.

I don't think that you presented your point poorly. I think that my criticism of your solutions stands though. They are all universally centered around suppressing the change. That does not work. You cannot 'soften the blow' by placing artificial barriers in employment figures. That simply introduces more inefficiency and devalues labor overall. What we need is a solution that works WITH the changes - embracing where they are taking us to rather than holding onto where we came from. These are rear looking solutions - ideas that try and hold onto the realities of the past that are going away just a bit longer. They sound good because they are comfortable and known but delaying the coming changes does not lessen the blow. it just moves it down the road a little bit.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

All of your 'solutions' focus on one single thing: suppressing the change rather than actually addressing it. That is not a solution and will ultimately fail miserably. Resisting change (or even trying to slow it down) is not only pointless but very counterproductive.

One possible idea that has actually been floated around even in conservative think tanks has been a guaranteed basic income. Essentially a check that the government pays you for being a citizen. In a society with a super majority of needed goods, this idea actually makes a fair amount of sense as the incentive to get people to contribute is no longer a necessity.

Well, perhaps I expressed myself poorly, but I am trying to generate ideas for channeling and softening the punch of the jobless economy and transitioning more easily to it.

There are different problems involved ehre, but I acknowledge that the technological change is 1) not going to be stopped, but perhaps we can slow some of it and give incentives to slowing the change so people can adapt and 2) it will be a technological utopia, pretty much, for those that manage to live to see it. But how can we get from here to there in one peace as a nation and as a people?

That is what I am trying to discuss instead of endless semantic squabbling over whether it is socialism to try and do anything about it at all.

I don't think that you presented your point poorly. I think that my criticism of your solutions stands though. They are all universally centered around suppressing the change. That does not work. You cannot 'soften the blow' by placing artificial barriers in employment figures. That simply introduces more inefficiency and devalues labor overall. What we need is a solution that works WITH the changes - embracing where they are taking us to rather than holding onto where we came from. These are rear looking solutions - ideas that try and hold onto the realities of the past that are going away just a bit longer. They sound good because they are comfortable and known but delaying the coming changes does not lessen the blow. it just moves it down the road a little bit.

With all due respect, I disagree. IT is a strategy based on buying TIME for 1) people to adjust mentally to a jobless economy, 2) for people to prepare for the jobless economy through purchase of self manufacturing capability of various kinds, and 3) to learn a new skill that will allow them to sell or barter items in the jobless economy.

I dont think any of that is a 'suppression' of change so much as merely managing the rate of change.

 

[sakinago]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

Another option, which is my own personal idea (as far as I know I haven't heard anyone else suggest this) is to require that all robotics or automation, etc., be owned privately by individual citizens to be rented or hired by companies. To protect the individual from the monopoly of labor.

For instance, the warehouse robot that loads trucks up with their goods is owned by private citizen John smith, who gets paid by warehouse incorporated to use that robot. The self driving truck that just got loaded by the robot is owned by private citizen Jane doe, who gets paid by transportion industries LLC to use that truck. And the person who buys the goods that the truck dropped off at the store and uses the self checkout line, well that self checkout machine is owned by Jonny Rogers who lives down the street, where Walmart pays him to use that machine. Jonny Rogers is quite elderly and needs help with his daily functions from healthcare bot, who is owned by suzie q.

Let me know what you think

 

[sakinago]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

All of your 'solutions' focus on one single thing: suppressing the change rather than actually addressing it. That is not a solution and will ultimately fail miserably. Resisting change (or even trying to slow it down) is not only pointless but very counterproductive.

One possible idea that has actually been floated around even in conservative think tanks has been a guaranteed basic income. Essentially a check that the government pays you for being a citizen. In a society with a super majority of needed goods, this idea actually makes a fair amount of sense as the incentive to get people to contribute is no longer a necessity.

Well, perhaps I expressed myself poorly, but I am trying to generate ideas for channeling and softening the punch of the jobless economy and transitioning more easily to it.

There are different problems involved ehre, but I acknowledge that the technological change is 1) not going to be stopped, but perhaps we can slow some of it and give incentives to slowing the change so people can adapt and 2) it will be a technological utopia, pretty much, for those that manage to live to see it. But how can we get from here to there in one peace as a nation and as a people?

That is what I am trying to discuss instead of endless semantic squabbling over whether it is socialism to try and do anything about it at all.

I don't think that you presented your point poorly. I think that my criticism of your solutions stands though. They are all universally centered around suppressing the change. That does not work. You cannot 'soften the blow' by placing artificial barriers in employment figures. That simply introduces more inefficiency and devalues labor overall. What we need is a solution that works WITH the changes - embracing where they are taking us to rather than holding onto where we came from. These are rear looking solutions - ideas that try and hold onto the realities of the past that are going away just a bit longer. They sound good because they are comfortable and known but delaying the coming changes does not lessen the blow. it just moves it down the road a little bit.

With all due respect, I disagree. IT is a strategy based on buying TIME for 1) people to adjust mentally to a jobless economy, 2) for people to prepare for the jobless economy through purchase of self manufacturing capability of various kinds, and 3) to learn a new skill that will allow them to sell or barter items in the jobless economy.

I dont think any of that is a 'suppression' of change so much as merely managing the rate of change.

Giving business the monopoly of labor through automation will only increase the wage gap drastically, you will have the large companies who can afford the automation, put small business who can't out of business. Then it's those who can afford robots, become super wealthy, vs those who can't. Even with a standard govt salary for all, prices of goods and services will be adjusted so that those who can't afford automation, will just be in the same shitty boat as everyone around them. We will all have an equally shitty standard of living, compared to those who can afford automation. And the number of those who can afford automation, will drastically shrink.

 

[westwall]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

That is actually a very good question, and frankly I don't have a good idea yet.

 

[320 Years of History]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

That is actually a very good question, and frankly I don't have a good idea yet.

Some directly actionable ideas:

• Be able to read and write original software.
• Be able to build, maintain and/or repair robots.
• Be able to design software and automated machines.
• Develop one's skills in areas that cannot be automated, but that can be supported by technology.

I think too many folks fail to realise that technology is an enabler to getting things done that it takes human ingenuity to invent and implement. Their failure to realize the distinction is, IMO, a meaningful share of the problem and misunderstanding. Folks who won't and don't suffer from tech's ever growing role in our economy/society are those who use the tech to do things the tech cannot do.

 

[westwall]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

That is actually a very good question, and frankly I don't have a good idea yet.

Some directly actionable ideas:

• Be able to read and write original software.
• Be able to build, maintain and/or repair robots.
• Be able to design software and automated machines.
• Develop one's skills in areas that cannot be automated, but that can be supported by technology.

I think too many folks fail to realise that technology is an enabler to getting things done that it takes human ingenuity to invent and implement. Their failure to realize the distinction is, IMO, a meaningful share of the problem and misunderstanding. Folks who won't and don't suffer from tech's ever growing role in our economy/society are those who use the tech to do things the tech cannot do.

There are billions of people on this planet. There will be a need for somewhere between one million to five million people to build and maintain the robots. The robots themselves will be able to do the majority of their own maintenance work. The reality is that there is a time coming soon, if we don't blow ourselves up first, where mankind will have nothing to do. Thus, there will be no jobs, no reason for an education for the vast majority of humanity etc.

It is a very real, and very serious problem.

 

[D Truth]

One answer for this thread's title question: read and apply the concepts described in The Third Wave: An Entrepreneur's Vision of the Future. Even if one doesn't apply the ideas to one's own development and quest for success, at the very least, having kids or mentoring kids, one should share the ideas with them and encourage them to apply them. In the book, one will find plenty of what I have often referred to as "writing on the wall" that if read and followed will greatly boost one's odds of finding the American Dream rather than leaving one behind to complain about the difficulty of achieving it.

Leaving behind Republicans. It's that hatred for education.

I seriously doubt you've ever talked to a single person who hates education. My guess is that you believe that anyone who doesn't share YOUR vision of education hates education.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/texasgop_pre/assets/original/2012Platform_Final.pdf

“Since data is (sic) clear that additional money does not translate into educational achievement, and higher education costs are out of control, we support reducing taxpayer funding to all levels of education institutions” (emphasis added).

The Terrifying Texas GOP Platform
------------------------------
These right wing fucking assholes make me so damn mad. They don't even know what their party stands for. You can print a GOP party platform and they scream "LIAR!!!!"

How can these asshole morons scream liar when it's their party platform that is being posted. I'm not making anything up. I don't have to. IT'S THEM. GET IT? IT'S THOSE FUCKERS WHO DON'T EVEN KNOW THE SHIT THEY PROMOTE!



These fuckers have been this way for years and deny the very shit they put out. These are some despicable people.

Aww.... look at the poor little dinosaur die out with her medieval hierarchy of "college people are the chosen ones". Funny how it takes engineers, mechanics, and entrepreneurs to really create business not some chosen social justice warrior professor. Modern technology promotes the producer to the forefront, while universities despise only seek to tear down any true advancement to preserve their own archaic degeneracy. Must be why little missy here is belly aching that her hollowed ancient institution of the "university" is being called out for the fraud that it is. Do you feel the bern bitch? Sorry, I'm not paying for your professor's new car... your ignorant refuse-to-learn-on-your-own ass is.

 

[D Truth]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

That is actually a very good question, and frankly I don't have a good idea yet.

Some directly actionable ideas:

• Be able to read and write original software.
• Be able to build, maintain and/or repair robots.
• Be able to design software and automated machines.
• Develop one's skills in areas that cannot be automated, but that can be supported by technology.

I think too many folks fail to realise that technology is an enabler to getting things done that it takes human ingenuity to invent and implement. Their failure to realize the distinction is, IMO, a meaningful share of the problem and misunderstanding. Folks who won't and don't suffer from tech's ever growing role in our economy/society are those who use the tech to do things the tech cannot do.

There are billions of people on this planet. There will be a need for somewhere between one million to five million people to build and maintain the robots. The robots themselves will be able to do the majority of their own maintenance work. The reality is that there is a time coming soon, if we don't blow ourselves up first, where mankind will have nothing to do. Thus, there will be no jobs, no reason for an education for the vast majority of humanity etc.

It is a very real, and very serious problem.

How is this for starters... Maybe we could go back to raising our own kids? It doesn't take a village, it takes parents.
Automation makes it easier.

From personal experience... Every time I automate processes for a client, it means I have more time with my kids... it means they have more time with their kids! It means that the media loses and family wins. Must be why we are seeing the lines being drawn as such. Anti-family people hate non-human automation, pro family people benefit from it.
People who argue against robotic, or technological automation are the very same who argue that mothers need to work 40 hours a week, children should be in "day care" and families should cease to exist. Unfortunately for them, muhahahah! Technology and the human soul wins every time!


Here is the bottom line. There is one side of the argument that pleads and bleats that we need human slaves.
Then there is the other that simply states we do not need slaves, machines will do that sort of work. Why not enjoy the newfound prosperity?
Oh yeah... cause there are "chosen ones" who simply cannot fathom the idea of there not being a slave class for them to exploit.... how sick are these sorts?!?

 

[320 Years of History]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

That is actually a very good question, and frankly I don't have a good idea yet.

Some directly actionable ideas:

• Be able to read and write original software.
• Be able to build, maintain and/or repair robots.
• Be able to design software and automated machines.
• Develop one's skills in areas that cannot be automated, but that can be supported by technology.

I think too many folks fail to realise that technology is an enabler to getting things done that it takes human ingenuity to invent and implement. Their failure to realize the distinction is, IMO, a meaningful share of the problem and misunderstanding. Folks who won't and don't suffer from tech's ever growing role in our economy/society are those who use the tech to do things the tech cannot do.

There are billions of people on this planet. There will be a need for somewhere between one million to five million people to build and maintain the robots. The robots themselves will be able to do the majority of their own maintenance work. The reality is that there is a time coming soon, if we don't blow ourselves up first, where mankind will have nothing to do. Thus, there will be no jobs, no reason for an education for the vast majority of humanity etc.

It is a very real, and very serious problem.

The only way we succeed as a group is not simply following directions, but in keeping each other accountable for our actions.
― A.J. Darkholme, Rise of the Morningstar​

The one thing a robot or software program cannot and will at no point in the foreseeable future be able to do is figure out that some other kind of robot is needed or wanted, and in turn act to design, build and deploy it/them. Robots can follow existing paradigms; they cannot invent new ones. That is what humans do and do better than any robot ever can or will. And that is what people must focus their career paths toward doing. Really, it's what they should have been doing all along; that is after all what innovation is about, for innovation is the key to success in a capitalistically competitive economy.

As a matter of practical reality, I seriously doubt self-repairing/self-upgrading robots and software are anywhere on the near term horizon. Why? First, because such devices would not need to be replaced with anything like the frequency demanded by the profit motive of companies that produce them. Second, because the state of art in failure detection simply isn't "there." Yes, there are cutting edge robots that have shown they can adjust to mishaps with themselves, but none that diagnose the problem, actively seek out the requisite items needed to effect a repair, and then carry it out. Third the "Internet of Things" isn't foreseeably going to exist to the extent that a robot is going to take itself to the repair/maintenance facility, or be visited by mobile repair robots when needed.

So, yes, there could conceivably come a time when robots can proactively repair other robots, but that time is not within the next 50 years. And 50 years is more than enough time for humans to "read the writing on the wall" and identify for themselves what career options hold their best prospects for a reliable and financially sufficient professional life.

If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.
― Henry Ford​

 

[westwall]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

That is actually a very good question, and frankly I don't have a good idea yet.

Some directly actionable ideas:

• Be able to read and write original software.
• Be able to build, maintain and/or repair robots.
• Be able to design software and automated machines.
• Develop one's skills in areas that cannot be automated, but that can be supported by technology.

I think too many folks fail to realise that technology is an enabler to getting things done that it takes human ingenuity to invent and implement. Their failure to realize the distinction is, IMO, a meaningful share of the problem and misunderstanding. Folks who won't and don't suffer from tech's ever growing role in our economy/society are those who use the tech to do things the tech cannot do.

There are billions of people on this planet. There will be a need for somewhere between one million to five million people to build and maintain the robots. The robots themselves will be able to do the majority of their own maintenance work. The reality is that there is a time coming soon, if we don't blow ourselves up first, where mankind will have nothing to do. Thus, there will be no jobs, no reason for an education for the vast majority of humanity etc.

It is a very real, and very serious problem.

The only way we succeed as a group is not simply following directions, but in keeping each other accountable for our actions.
― A.J. Darkholme, Rise of the Morningstar​

The one thing a robot or software program cannot and will at no point in the foreseeable future be able to do is figure out that some other kind of robot is needed or wanted, and in turn act to design, build and deploy it/them. Robots can follow existing paradigms; they cannot invent new ones. That is what humans do and do better than any robot ever can or will. And that is what people must focus their career paths toward doing. Really, it's what they should have been doing all along; that is after all what innovation is about, for innovation is the key to success in a capitalistically competitive economy.

As a matter of practical reality, I seriously doubt self-repairing/self-upgrading robots and software are anywhere on the near term horizon. Why? First, because such devices would not need to be replaced with anything like the frequency demanded by the profit motive of companies that produce them. Second, because the state of art in failure detection simply isn't "there." Yes, there are cutting edge robots that have shown they can adjust to mishaps with themselves, but none that diagnose the problem, actively seek out the requisite items needed to effect a repair, and then carry it out. Third the "Internet of Things" isn't foreseeably going to exist to the extent that a robot is going to take itself to the repair/maintenance facility, or be visited by mobile repair robots when needed.

So, yes, there could conceivably come a time when robots can proactively repair other robots, but that time is not within the next 50 years. And 50 years is more than enough time for humans to "read the writing on the wall" and identify for themselves what career options hold their best prospects for a reliable and financially sufficient professional life.

If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.
― Henry Ford​

You are incorrect. As AI improves robots will most certainly be able to figure out how to both improve themselves, and develop better robots for needs that WE haven't foreseen, but that the robots do.

 

[320 Years of History]

Well, the Third Industrial Revolution aka Digital Revolution is already in full swing.

We have seen real inflation adjusted after tax Middle Class incomes stagnate and go down since 1970 and this is just the first negative aspect of robotics, computerization and automation.

Other risks such as a Robot Revolt (i.e. Skynet), or Automated error in services that cannot be fixed (Hello Steam!) and so forth are all risks from the Digital Revolution we all face.

So how can we make this transition to a mostly Jobless economy more positive and less threatening to the average worker?

1. Disincentivise Automation. Give tax breaks that encourage companies to continue the hiring of people and less the automation of the work force. We dont have to rush to fully automate and there are benefits to letting it percolate slower.

2. Require all automated services have an human element that the customer can appeal to if/when they have issues with service. Think you Robo-doc got the dermetitis diagnosis wrong? There must be a human doctor on staff to appeal the robo-diagnosis to. Same goes to every other service from online stores to an automated medical staff.

3. Require all maintenance and installation of Robots and other automated devices be done by human beings.

4. Require all code written for a Robot or automated device to be at minimum 51% of all top level code to be written by a human being. All other code must be 10% human origin and signed off on by a human for passing validation and integration testing.


If we can reduce the speed at which the automation and robotic conversion of the work force occurs, then we can have a much more stable and risk free transition to our technological utopia.

That is actually a very good question, and frankly I don't have a good idea yet.

Some directly actionable ideas:

• Be able to read and write original software.
• Be able to build, maintain and/or repair robots.
• Be able to design software and automated machines.
• Develop one's skills in areas that cannot be automated, but that can be supported by technology.

I think too many folks fail to realise that technology is an enabler to getting things done that it takes human ingenuity to invent and implement. Their failure to realize the distinction is, IMO, a meaningful share of the problem and misunderstanding. Folks who won't and don't suffer from tech's ever growing role in our economy/society are those who use the tech to do things the tech cannot do.

There are billions of people on this planet. There will be a need for somewhere between one million to five million people to build and maintain the robots. The robots themselves will be able to do the majority of their own maintenance work. The reality is that there is a time coming soon, if we don't blow ourselves up first, where mankind will have nothing to do. Thus, there will be no jobs, no reason for an education for the vast majority of humanity etc.

It is a very real, and very serious problem.

The only way we succeed as a group is not simply following directions, but in keeping each other accountable for our actions.
― A.J. Darkholme, Rise of the Morningstar​

The one thing a robot or software program cannot and will at no point in the foreseeable future be able to do is figure out that some other kind of robot is needed or wanted, and in turn act to design, build and deploy it/them. Robots can follow existing paradigms; they cannot invent new ones. That is what humans do and do better than any robot ever can or will. And that is what people must focus their career paths toward doing. Really, it's what they should have been doing all along; that is after all what innovation is about, for innovation is the key to success in a capitalistically competitive economy.

As a matter of practical reality, I seriously doubt self-repairing/self-upgrading robots and software are anywhere on the near term horizon. Why? First, because such devices would not need to be replaced with anything like the frequency demanded by the profit motive of companies that produce them. Second, because the state of art in failure detection simply isn't "there." Yes, there are cutting edge robots that have shown they can adjust to mishaps with themselves, but none that diagnose the problem, actively seek out the requisite items needed to effect a repair, and then carry it out. Third the "Internet of Things" isn't foreseeably going to exist to the extent that a robot is going to take itself to the repair/maintenance facility, or be visited by mobile repair robots when needed.

So, yes, there could conceivably come a time when robots can proactively repair other robots, but that time is not within the next 50 years. And 50 years is more than enough time for humans to "read the writing on the wall" and identify for themselves what career options hold their best prospects for a reliable and financially sufficient professional life.

If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.
― Henry Ford​

You are incorrect. As AI improves robots will most certainly be able to figure out how to both improve themselves, and develop better robots for needs that WE haven't foreseen, but that the robots do.

Red:
And what credible evidence have you to show that you are correct? You will notice that I didn't just respond to you with merely my opinion. I presented a conclusion shown by rigorously developed research. And to that your reply is, "You are incorrect." Based on what? Your saying so? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

 

[westwall]

That is actually a very good question, and frankly I don't have a good idea yet.

Some directly actionable ideas:

• Be able to read and write original software.
• Be able to build, maintain and/or repair robots.
• Be able to design software and automated machines.
• Develop one's skills in areas that cannot be automated, but that can be supported by technology.

I think too many folks fail to realise that technology is an enabler to getting things done that it takes human ingenuity to invent and implement. Their failure to realize the distinction is, IMO, a meaningful share of the problem and misunderstanding. Folks who won't and don't suffer from tech's ever growing role in our economy/society are those who use the tech to do things the tech cannot do.

There are billions of people on this planet. There will be a need for somewhere between one million to five million people to build and maintain the robots. The robots themselves will be able to do the majority of their own maintenance work. The reality is that there is a time coming soon, if we don't blow ourselves up first, where mankind will have nothing to do. Thus, there will be no jobs, no reason for an education for the vast majority of humanity etc.

It is a very real, and very serious problem.

The only way we succeed as a group is not simply following directions, but in keeping each other accountable for our actions.
― A.J. Darkholme, Rise of the Morningstar​

The one thing a robot or software program cannot and will at no point in the foreseeable future be able to do is figure out that some other kind of robot is needed or wanted, and in turn act to design, build and deploy it/them. Robots can follow existing paradigms; they cannot invent new ones. That is what humans do and do better than any robot ever can or will. And that is what people must focus their career paths toward doing. Really, it's what they should have been doing all along; that is after all what innovation is about, for innovation is the key to success in a capitalistically competitive economy.

As a matter of practical reality, I seriously doubt self-repairing/self-upgrading robots and software are anywhere on the near term horizon. Why? First, because such devices would not need to be replaced with anything like the frequency demanded by the profit motive of companies that produce them. Second, because the state of art in failure detection simply isn't "there." Yes, there are cutting edge robots that have shown they can adjust to mishaps with themselves, but none that diagnose the problem, actively seek out the requisite items needed to effect a repair, and then carry it out. Third the "Internet of Things" isn't foreseeably going to exist to the extent that a robot is going to take itself to the repair/maintenance facility, or be visited by mobile repair robots when needed.

So, yes, there could conceivably come a time when robots can proactively repair other robots, but that time is not within the next 50 years. And 50 years is more than enough time for humans to "read the writing on the wall" and identify for themselves what career options hold their best prospects for a reliable and financially sufficient professional life.

If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.
― Henry Ford​

You are incorrect. As AI improves robots will most certainly be able to figure out how to both improve themselves, and develop better robots for needs that WE haven't foreseen, but that the robots do.

Red:
And what credible evidence have you to show that you are correct? You will notice that I didn't just respond to you with merely my opinion. I presented a conclusion shown by rigorously developed research. And to that your reply is, "You are incorrect." Based on what? Your saying so? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Really? Where is your "rigorously developed research?" I base my opinion on talking with scientists involved with AI research. They have been working on it for years.

Google reveals it is developing a computer so smart it can program ITSELF

• Neural Turing Machine being developed by Deep Mind, which Google bought in January
• Project mimics properties of the human brain's short-term working memory
• Tech giant is also working on quantum chips based on the human brain

Read more: Google developing a computer so smart it can program ITSELF
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Google developing a computer so smart it can program ITSELF


And here is a robot recognizing itself for the first time. Self awareness is a trait that most animals never attain.

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

 

[JimBowie1958]

You are incorrect. As AI improves robots will most certainly be able to figure out how to both improve themselves, and develop better robots for needs that WE haven't foreseen, but that the robots do.

Red:
And what credible evidence have you to show that you are correct? You will notice that I didn't just respond to you with merely my opinion. I presented a conclusion shown by rigorously developed research. And to that your reply is, "You are incorrect." Based on what? Your saying so? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

320, 'Strong AI' is able to do that, in theory, and the software is coming along that will allow programs to not only design programs (given the specs) but to also devise what the specs should be, what the problem is and what it's solution requires.

That is the goal of people advancing 'Strong AI' and why so many others deeply oppose and conjure up stories and comparisons to the Terminators 'Sky Net'.

How Robots Work
Some modern robots also have the ability to learn in a limited capacity. Learning robots recognize if a certain action (moving its legs in a certain way, for instance) achieved a desired result (navigating an obstacle). The robot stores this information and attempts the successful action the next time it encounters the same situation. Again, modern computers can only do this in very limited situations. They can't absorb any sort of information like a human can. Some robots can learn by mimicking human actions. In Japan, roboticists have taught a robot to dance by demonstrating the moves themselves....

Just as physical robotic design is a handy tool for understanding animal and human anatomy, AI research is useful for understanding how natural intelligence works. For some roboticists, this insight is the ultimate goal of designing robots. Others envision a world where we live side by side with intelligent machines and use a variety of lesser robots for manual labor, health care and communication. A number of robotics experts predict that robotic evolution will ultimately turn us into cyborgs -- humans integrated with machines. Conceivably, people in the future could load their minds into a sturdy robot and live for thousands of years!

I wanna be a cyborg!

Stephen Hawking warns artificial intelligence could end mankind - BBC News

Is Strong Artificial Intelligence a New Life-Form? – Part 3/4

AI, Robotics, and the Future of Jobs
Will networked, automated, artificial intelligence (AI) applications and robotic devices have displaced more jobs than they have created by 2025?

Half of these experts (48%) envision a future in which robots and digital agents have displaced significant numbers of both blue- and white-collar workers—with many expressing concern that this will lead to vast increases in income inequality, masses of people who are effectively unemployable, and breakdowns in the social order.

The other half of the experts who responded to this survey (52%) expect that technology will not displace more jobs than it creates by 2025. To be sure, this group anticipates that many jobs currently performed by humans will be substantially taken over by robots or digital agents by 2025. But they have faith that human ingenuity will create new jobs, industries, and ways to make a living, just as it has been doing since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution.

That is hopeful, but likely wrong IMO.

You Should Be Afraid of Artificial Intelligence
In all of my research, I cannot find a definitive answer to the following question: How we can ensure humans will be able to control AI once it achieves human-level intelligence?...

Researchers hope to create a platform that would allow an individual to identify a household problem that needs assistance; then head to a local printing store to select a blueprint, from a library of robotic designs; and then customize an easy-to-use robotic device that could solve the problem. Within 24 hours, the robot would be printed, assembled, fully programmed and ready for action.

By altering the way in which machines can be produced, designed and built, the project could have far reaching implications for a variety of fields.

“This project aims to dramatically reduce the development time for a variety of useful robots, opening the doors to potential applications in manufacturing, education, personalized health care and even disaster relief,” says Rob Wood, an associate professor at Harvard University.


FEAR MY ROBOT ARMY!

 

[JimBowie1958]

How is this for starters... Maybe we could go back to raising our own kids? It doesn't take a village, it takes parents.
Automation makes it easier.

From personal experience... Every time I automate processes for a client, it means I have more time with my kids... it means they have more time with their kids! It means that the media loses and family wins. Must be why we are seeing the lines being drawn as such. Anti-family people hate non-human automation, pro family people benefit from it.
People who argue against robotic, or technological automation are the very same who argue that mothers need to work 40 hours a week, children should be in "day care" and families should cease to exist. Unfortunately for them, muhahahah! Technology and the human soul wins every time!


Here is the bottom line. There is one side of the argument that pleads and bleats that we need human slaves.
Then there is the other that simply states we do not need slaves, machines will do that sort of work. Why not enjoy the newfound prosperity?
Oh yeah... cause there are "chosen ones" who simply cannot fathom the idea of there not being a slave class for them to exploit.... how sick are these sorts?!?

In the coming jobless economy, you are going to have lots of time with your kids, but how will you pay the cost of doing anything with them?

We are going to have to move to a cashless society too, to some extent, and the barter of home made goods using 3D tech and nano-manufacturing will be key to helping people through this economic transition.

I think we can make this transition and will, but we need to consider what our options are BEFORE we get there.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Another option, which is my own personal idea (as far as I know I haven't heard anyone else suggest this) is to require that all robotics or automation, etc., be owned privately by individual citizens to be rented or hired by companies. To protect the individual from the monopoly of labor.

For instance, the warehouse robot that loads trucks up with their goods is owned by private citizen John smith, who gets paid by warehouse incorporated to use that robot. The self driving truck that just got loaded by the robot is owned by private citizen Jane doe, who gets paid by transportion industries LLC to use that truck. And the person who buys the goods that the truck dropped off at the store and uses the self checkout line, well that self checkout machine is owned by Jonny Rogers who lives down the street, where Walmart pays him to use that machine. Jonny Rogers is quite elderly and needs help with his daily functions from healthcare bot, who is owned by suzie q.

Let me know what you think

It sounds interesting but also relies on the government to enforce the law. Current black market labor practices might suggest that the corporations would circumvent the law you propose as well.

 

[xband]

There will always be high paying jobs for robot repairmen. I retired a robot repairman and never went to college but had military computer, electronics, electrical and mechanical training.

 

[JimBowie1958]

There will always be high paying jobs for robot repairmen. I retired a robot repairman and never went to college but had military computer, electronics, electrical and mechanical training.

If robots/androids are ever built that can design, build and repair other robots, why wont the robot repair men disappear like the other jobs will?

 

[xband]

There will always be high paying jobs for robot repairmen. I retired a robot repairman and never went to college but had military computer, electronics, electrical and mechanical training.

If robots/androids are ever built that can design, build and repair other robots, why wont the robot repair men disappear like the other jobs will?

Indeed not. Robots are limited to their human programming in the least.

 

[320 Years of History]

Where is your "rigorously developed research?"

Did you click on the link in post 70? Upon doing so, did you read the content found there?