PdotMichael
Banned
You are replacing welfare with support of the parents, which is like the same soup just worse.
160 new jobs.
The USA will also get a Speedfactory next year.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Foxconn replaces 60,000 factory workers with robots
- Thread starter Spring Drive
- Start date
- Status
You are replacing welfare with support of the parents, which is like the same soup just worse.
160 new jobs.
The USA will also get a Speedfactory next year.
EASTC0AST_GH05T
Member
Been telling people since the 90's that its going to be a rise of the machines and Skynet is taking over.
dragonfart28
Banned
The people who lost their jobs to the robots.
darkinstinct
...lacks reading comprehension.
China will find a way. They just change faster. It took us 150 years from industry age to service age, they will force it within 30 years tops. Just like they did with moving people from the fields to the cities to work in factories.
Took Foxconn long enough, in 2011 they ordered 1 million robots (which at the time would double the worldwide use of industry robots). But demand for those things is high and apparantly Foxconn only gets 30.000 a year. Or can only afford that many at 200.000 a piece.
dragonfart28
Banned
How can you not understand it?
Social justice through purchasing habits is not as effective as direct intervention by government.
M0nochromatic
Member
We'll bail out any companies or financial institutions because they just made a little mistake.
Poor people buying needing to buy necessities? They should pay the consequences for not working hard enough and stop leeching off of the country.
It's going to be a shit storm when it starts making it's way through America.
We will start seeing this in next ten years, for sure. It'll hit driving jobs, which are also the largest vocation in this country.
milanbaros
Member?
China has a shrinking workforce, if they want to increase output they need to increase productivity. If they want to increase productivity they need to increase automation.
PdotMichael
Banned
They have Japan as role model which took a leading role because of tbe shrinking population.
Theres a guy at work who can't read, he sorts boxes in the warehouse purely by the look of them. He's slow and far from being the best worker, but we're union and the bosses gave up hassling him. i'd guess he's at the high end of 30s.
Is he going to go back to school to learn how to make robots?
The industrial revolution replaced menial jobs with other more efficient menial jobs, not exactly equivalent to turning a shelf stocker into an engineer.
I fear stuff like this automation is going to cause great social upheaval across the globe.
The countries that will be hurt the hardest will be places like India, the Middle East and Africa.
There is going to be millions of poor and hungry refugees, desperate to get into the wealthy countries and enjoy the benefits of Basic Income and other social programs put in place.
Probably triggering a major nativist backlash of people trying to protect their priviliged position. We are already seeing it with Trump and different Rightwing parties in Europe.
I think anyone that thinks racism/nativism will be gone in 20-25 years are being delusional. Automation will exacerbate inequalites across the world and the people sheltered from the worst of technological change will fight hard to keep their priviliged position.
I've got a bad feeling about this you guys...
The countries that will be hurt the hardest will be places like India, the Middle East and Africa.
There is going to be millions of poor and hungry refugees, desperate to get into the wealthy countries and enjoy the benefits of Basic Income and other social programs put in place.
Probably triggering a major nativist backlash of people trying to protect their priviliged position. We are already seeing it with Trump and different Rightwing parties in Europe.
I think anyone that thinks racism/nativism will be gone in 20-25 years are being delusional. Automation will exacerbate inequalites across the world and the people sheltered from the worst of technological change will fight hard to keep their priviliged position.
I've got a bad feeling about this you guys...
You are right. Also, couple this with a damaged world, and you have an almost comic book like scenario of Murphy's Law in action for societies all over the world.
The ones most prone to this problem happen to be those on the lower end, which is exactly the same group most prone to climate change, if we were considering the scale by nations.
People immigrating to countries less impacted are going to be crazy prone to being persecuted and even rejected regarding aid. Most basic income advocates unfortunately admit creating a program would be national, and this may in fact only apply to citizens, making immigrants on a long waiting list.
Be mindful that you are at least aware. Become more aware of those who don't see the signs, for it's the masses who may in fact be uneducated to the tenacity of the situation. We all hold myths in some fashion, and myths on issues such as this only make it harder for us to make accountable actions.
There are a wide variety of articles about how China is doing so already.
China plans to phase in mass automation by 2020
China's robot revolution
Automation will be more of an eventual positive for China rather than a negative.
I can only see jobs that rely mostly on sheer human creativity and imagination being able to survive automation, at least at first. Its easy to replace menial labor jobs and even some white collar jobs but asking an AI to write an award winning movie seems like a slightly steeper challenge for our machine overlords, at least considering where our tech. is currently at. Things like acting, being an artist, being a creative type, possibly working in live entertainment, etc.
Not too mention I can see certain jobs like raising children to be considered safer than other things. Then again if parents are willing to trust a self driving car to take their kids to and from school then maybe they'd become more acclimated to letting a machine teach their kids their letters and numbers.
Not too mention I can see certain jobs like raising children to be considered safer than other things. Then again if parents are willing to trust a self driving car to take their kids to and from school then maybe they'd become more acclimated to letting a machine teach their kids their letters and numbers.
Most basic income advocates unfortunately admit creating a program would be national, and this may in fact only apply to citizens, making immigrants on a long waiting list.
The problem with Basic Income is there will be a very direct correlaton between how much money is left for our "own" citizens with how much you give out to foreigners in other countries.
If your giving people a choice of "You can receive a basic income of $2.000 a month and at the same time we will do a lot to help immigrants and the poorest people in the world OR you can get $2.500 a month and we dedicate all our resources to helping "our people".
I think a majority will be selfish and choose the $2.500.
I am not sure a government would or should even make that option to people. It then starts making the unconditional element of a basic income conditional.
If we're trying to offer baseline income to cover the basic basics, this needs as few conditions of the individual to hit as means-testing as possible. That unfortunately means your example would not even be on the table, even as entertainment. We'd instead be entertaining how to create the program nationally, which for some nations, like America, cannot even be unconditional by design, unless one wants a spike in taxes. The best proposal I've seen for America is a $1.5 trillion plan, but that involves retrofitting the welfare system, excluding people under 18, people on social security, and people making over $100k. Going the whole way doubles that number, easily, and then the tax spike comes in, which would essentially kill it unless we have a major change in attitude to taxes.
What I meant was, you might have 2 political parties vying for votes and they could one-up each other by making a proposal of giving every citizen a raise which would be paid for
by giving less help towards immigrants/the poorest people in the world.
In that case I'm not sure a majority of the population would vote for the party with the high-minded humanitarian policy option.
Sorry if it wasn't clear.
I think the problem there is not of policy, or even of party, but of perception.
Humanitarian efforts matter little so long as one defines themselves and the world in divided, bubbled off terms. We are still a species too egoic in our ways of thinking, perceiving, and straight up living that you can only get egalitarianism or humanitarianism through the breaking of those conceptual shackles. People who want to help others grasp that one is acting with another being they go with in this world. Too many make boundaries that separate people, and that only fuels the problems we alluded to.
It's a problem of seeing the world in the lens of Self vs Other, when reality is Self and Other. One is divisive, and one is unitive. We are caught in the former, but what we know of reality in a literal, objective sense is only the latter. And this is an issue no policy can ever address; it's left to people with enough education, information, time, and effort to inquire and peel through the onions of our own minds.
So long as we live as egos, we will want policies and ideas that keep the division going. Sorry if this is all too Zen, but I think nondualism and proposals like this go hand in hand.
The problem is that consumers won't be able to afford any of those products since they will be out of a job.
engines created a ton of other jobs with their invention. will automation create a ton of other jobs for people?
I just read McDonald's ex-CEO comments on the costs associated with automation and the next 5-10 years should be fairly interesting across the board. Will we decide to "create" more nonsense jobs, will it be the rich not giving a shit or will there finally be a push for basic income.
McDonalds ex-CEO: $15/hr minimum wage will unleash the robot rebellion
McDonalds ex-CEO: $15/hr minimum wage will unleash the robot rebellion
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
It is only a positive if your population count is adjusted accordingly, and the bigger the population is the longer it takes and the more difficult it is to make that adjustment, so no it won't be.
The current population count is like the dotcom bubble before it popped, except it won't recover. Developed countries with falling population count will be better off.
PdotMichael
Banned
Looking at fields with already high level of automation. Yes.
Robots will still jobs from people the way motorized vehicles stole jobs from horses.
paradise_circus
Member
urban areas with good infrastructure will do more service oriented jobs I guess... like in modern cities.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
This quote mirrors pretty closely what I'm afraid of:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/24/robots-future-work-humans-jobs-leisure
People often say "well I'll just chill whole day when I don't have to do any work", but I think the importance of a sense of purpose is heavily underestimated by them. Just take a look at how many retired people become depressed when the step out of the workforce. And those are the people who can solace themselves that they've actually deserved the years of rest because of how much they've contributed to society already. Now imagine someone young who contributed literally nothing (and won't ever be able to) having to experience the same, with nothing to solace themselves with.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/24/robots-future-work-humans-jobs-leisure
People often say "well I'll just chill whole day when I don't have to do any work", but I think the importance of a sense of purpose is heavily underestimated by them. Just take a look at how many retired people become depressed when the step out of the workforce. And those are the people who can solace themselves that they've actually deserved the years of rest because of how much they've contributed to society already. Now imagine someone young who contributed literally nothing (and won't ever be able to) having to experience the same, with nothing to solace themselves with.
Engines didn't create any jobs, what engines did was they allowed to do a lot of stuff a lot faster and a lot cheaper. Say a bulldozer on a construction site moves an equivalent mass of stuff as otherwise 60 people would. So you might consider it as 59 jobs lost (you still need someone to operate the vehicle), but those 59 people are simply freed for the society to use their energy and resources elsewhere - they are freed from doing extremely hard, soul crushing and health destroying work and could provide something of value in other areas of life.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
This is a good thing.
PdotMichael
Banned
Engines were never used to just set off labours. Improvement in production efficency means you can produce and build more things faster and cheaper, which increases demand, which leads to a higher demand of workers to operate, maintain and build the engines and machines.
Just curious, how can a robot replace a lawyer?
Robots increasing efficiency is similarly going to benefit us all. You'll still need engineers to design, operate and maintain those robots (just like you need with engines), so there is going to be some employment around them. But otherwise, we are much better off offloading menial tasks to machines and doing something that is more fulfilling and demanding.
More like an AI assistant will replace people like para legals and such. The lawyer might remain but his office will probably be a lot emptier in the future. Basically any job that is just taking care of paperwork and things of that nature will be disappearing as fast as manufacturing jobs, maybe even sooner as they often don't require physical machinery to do the job that isn't already present in most offices. Need a report? Your AI assistant is already printing it out for you while scheduling your meeting with the clients for an upcoming trial while also giving you constant updates on an ongoing case.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Thing is, we'll be offloading a LOT more than just menial tasks to robots and AI. And the world needs only so many movie directors, TV show hosts and novelists.
We already have and the world has not collapsed. Eg. you have ATMs and web apps that provide various services where in the past you had to employ a ton of people that had face to face contact with customers.
IDK, it might get to such degree that robots and AI almost completely squeeze out any need for human activity, but I think we're long time away from that point.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Very interesting!
rokkerkory
Member
great job guys, let's automate everything so humans have nothing to do
Philosophy is gonna get good.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Yeah nothing else to do in life than work!
We will have plenty to do. But instead of doing stuff just to boost consumption, we'll be studying to work on projects like space colonization and others that are more globally important.
Actually, that people are going to be replaced by robots is a good thing imo. This means that there is less work that NEED to be done or produced by humans. I mean, the real reason we build machines is to free us from compulsory labor and to produce enough, isn't it?
The problem is that the society doesn't use the advantages of the automation correctly, imo.
The problem is that the society doesn't use the advantages of the automation correctly, imo.
I interviewed for a company that makes software to search for legal loopholes in contracts. Computers are good at that kind of stuff. Same goes for doctors - Watson was invented to automate diagnosis.
People vote in their interest. The status quo works for most people so we aren't drastically changing entitlements. If a large percentage of the workforce is unemployed because of automation, they will vote in politicians who will help them.
- Status