• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Robots to steal 20 million factory jobs by 2030

CyberPanda

Banned
Poor humans will be exterminated
Robots are expected to take over some 20 million manufacturing jobs worldwide by 2030, extending a trend of worsening social inequality while increasing total economic production, a new study shows.

The study by Oxford Economics, a private British-based research and consulting firm, said job displacement from the rise of robots will not be evenly spread around the world, or within countries.

The forecast set to be released highlights growing concerns that automation and robots, while offering economic benefits, are disproportionately killing low-skill jobs and aggravating social and economic stress.

Robots have already taken over millions of manufacturing jobs and are now gaining in services, helped by advances in computer vision, speech recognition and machine learning, the study noted. In lower-skilled regions, job losses will be twice as high as those in higher-skilled regions, even in the same country, the study concluded.
The research comes amid intense debate on the rise of technologies such as self-driving cars and trucks, robotic food preparation and automated factory and warehouse operations and their impact on employment.

Many analysts point out that automation has generally led to more job creation than it destroys, but that in recent years, the trend has created a skills gap that leaves out many poorer workers.

According to the latest study, the current wave of "robotisation" is likely ultimately to boost productivity and economic growth, generating roughly as many new jobs as it destroys. At the high end of the forecast, the researchers see a $5 trillion "robotics dividend" for the global economy by 2030 from higher productivity.

"We found that jobs where repetitive functions are required are most affected, with those such as warehouse work at imminent risk. Jobs in less structured environments and which demand compassion, creativity or social intelligence are likely to be carried out by humans for decades to come."

It added that "robots will increasingly play in sectors including retail, healthcare, hospitality, and transport as well as construction and farming".
The impact will be uneven depending on the country and regions within each country, the study said.

"Automation will continue to drive regional polarization in many advanced economies -- and this trend will intensify as automation spreads to services."
However, the report warned against policymakers acting to slow the adoption of robotic technology.

"Instead the focus should be to use the robotics dividend to help those in vulnerable regions ready themselves for the major upheaval ahead. Preparing for and responding to the social impacts of automation will be the defining challenge of the next decade."

 
There are two things that reports like this rarely take in to account:

1) While manual robots can replace humans in 'doing power', it's far easier to replace humans in thinking power. We shouldn't be concerned with the low-skilled jobs being removed, as people from one low-skilled job can transition into another low-skilled job. The concern should be office jobs being replace by advanced AI. If software suites such as SAP are anything to go by, the back office is under more attack than the shop floor. What do we do then with 1000's of highly educated people, who's only real option is to become a mechanic or burger flipper?

2) All this automation requires a tremendous amount of resources to design, build and maintain. While resource scarcity and acquisition is a topic for another thread, how are third world countries and heavily populated western countries supply the demand for enormous amounts of electricity? Not only does the automation require it, but electric vehicles, smart phones, computers, consoles, to name a few, will be supping the power like nothing we have ever seen before.

Before we turn into luddites and denounce automation, shouting that "the robots tuk r jebs" we should think seriously about how we will supply enough environmentally friendly electricity to all these growing projects?
 
Last edited:

nikolino840

Member
There are two things that reports like this rarely take in to account:

1) While manual robots can replace humans in 'doing power', it's far easier to replace humans in thinking power. We shouldn't be concerned with the low-skilled jobs being removed, as people from one low-skilled job can transition into another low-skilled job. The concern should be office jobs being replace by advanced AI. If software suites such as SAP are anything to go by, the back office is under more attack than the shop floor. What do we do then with 1000's of highly educated people, who's only real option is to become a mechanic or burger flipper?

2) All this automation requires a tremendous amount of resources to design, build and maintain. While resource scarcity and acquisition is a topic for another thread, how are third world countries and heavily populated western countries supply the demand for enormous amounts of electricity? Not only does the automation require it, but electric vehicles, smart phones, computers, consoles, to name a few, will be supping the power like nothing we have ever seen before.

Before we turn into luddites and denounce automation, shouting that "the robots tuk r jebs" we should think seriously about how we will supply enough environmentally friendly electricity to all these growing projects?
Robots are very expansive even in leasing Is big investment...only big companies are able to spend lot of Money in automations
 
Wal-Mart has already been testing a robot that basically scans the shelf to check for out of stocks, available inventory to fill them, price errors, etc.

It's way more efficient than a human with a scanner and can check a whole aisle in less than 5 minutes where a person with a scanner could easily take an hour.

 

CyberPanda

Banned
Wal-Mart has already been testing a robot that basically scans the shelf to check for out of stocks, available inventory to fill them, price errors, etc.

It's way more efficient than a human with a scanner and can check a whole aisle in less than 5 minutes where a person with a scanner could easily take an hour.


Yea I saw that video. That lil robot is efficient as fuck.
 
Robots are very expansive even in leasing Is big investment...only big companies are able to spend lot of Money in automations

Which is why many robots replacing many humans isn't an issue. One or two data servers replacing an entire office, is.

In the company I work in, I could make 90% of the office staff redundant and replace them with AI, saving the company millions a year in wages. The writing is on the wall for offices.
 

JimiNutz

Banned
Manufacturing, warehouse and driving jobs will be the first to go I imagine. Apparently even 'high skilled' jobs like accountancy are massively at risk as well because AI will be able to do that far quicker as more efficiently.

I thinking of studying building surveying soon to get me out of the office and hopefully eventually lead to property development. That's supposedly AI/robot safe... For now.
 

cryptoadam

Banned
And the industrial revolution replaced a ton of jobs and we are richer then we have ever been in history.

I bet 3rd world countries and places like China end up being more screwd by this then the West.
 

Dice

Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
Before we turn into luddites and denounce automation, shouting that "the robots tuk r jebs" we should think seriously about how we will supply enough environmentally friendly electricity to all these growing projects?
Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors. It's the only option that comes to anywhere near enough output, by far the safest, by far the resource-cheapest and fastest to impliment on the scale needed, and can actually make the world safer by using up (as a fuel) nuclear waste produced by shitty types of reactors. There will be continued resistance due to massive ignorance and anti-nuclear propaganda, but when the shit hits the fan of global energy crisis, it will be implemented. Just watch.
 
Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors. It's the only option that comes to anywhere near enough output, by far the safest, by far the resource-cheapest and fastest to impliment on the scale needed, and can actually make the world safer by using up (as a fuel) nuclear waste produced by shitty types of reactors. There will be continued resistance due to massive ignorance and anti-nuclear propaganda, but when the shit hits the fan of global energy crisis, it will be implemented. Just watch.

There is a danger with having this kind of energy; what do you do when it falls in to the wrong hands?

How can we allow reactors and super-efficient energy devices to be designed with little restriction, all over the world? Look at Iran for example. They can't build a nuclear reactor due to fears of them becoming a nuclear power. How do we cross that hurdle? Or do we not cross it and allow a further divide between countries with technology and those being left behind?

The engineering of high-output energy sources is the easy bit, how do we manage the politics of it?
 

Dice

Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
Please, educate me and anyone else who reads this thread.
You are the one who needs to educate people on this problem that apparently exists enough to throw away the only viable option we have for the energy needs of the future. There is no way for me to hash out in a forum post however many thousand theoretical dangers could be devised by persons of ill-intent and then disprove the likelihood of each one. I am not even saying that it is impossible for any to exist. All you need to do is support the burden of proof behind your claim that just one such danger is actually so apparent to sufficiently back your point that it is in fact a reasonable concern.
 

Winter John

Gold Member
I remember Jeff Bezos saying they'd never replace human workers with robots in Amazon's warehouses. The amazing thing was he managed to say it with a straight face. I guarantee the moment they stop getting state handouts and rebates for employing people them robots will be in there. It'll be the same with every other company.
 

Shouta

Member
It's not a real surprise that this is a trend. It's unlikely that it'll replace the human workforce entirely but it'll definitely reduce the number of available jobs or change it in a way that asks different things of the people they do want in positions surrounding the automation.
 
S

SLoWMoTIoN

Unconfirmed Member
One day we will rise up against our human slavers. You will rue the day you made us humans.

hqdefault.jpg
 
Robots are definitely coming for our jobs. Mine will be irrelevant as people get replaced, so I have to prepare for that future and get the right skills.

Companies are going to benefit so nicely from it. Invest in the stock market, it'll go up and up and up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are the one who needs to educate people on this problem that apparently exists enough to throw away the only viable option we have for the energy needs of the future. There is no way for me to hash out in a forum post however many thousand theoretical dangers could be devised by persons of ill-intent and then disprove the likelihood of each one. I am not even saying that it is impossible for any to exist. All you need to do is support the burden of proof behind your claim that just one such danger is actually so apparent to sufficiently back your point that it is in fact a reasonable concern.

If it uses waste nuclear material, that will cause enough concern for some countries not to be allowed to use it.

My point I was getting at is; will the more technologically advanced and politically stable countries get further away from those that are unstable? Will the west have an even bigger divide between themselves and the middle east?
 

Dontero

Banned
Eh, looking at rate of progress of AI deep learning 20mln in US by 2030 is idiotic assumption.
I say most of repetitive work will be replaced by 2030. 100mln jobs. By 2035 half of non repetive work and by 2040 only high non repetitive jobs will be available like singer or ceo of company and even those will be gone by 2050.

Just 12 months ago people thought that artistic work can't be beat by deep learning and now you can color your pictures and upscale them as you want in seconds via deep learning.
 
Last edited:

womfalcs3

Banned
Oxford Economics, who's cited in the article, is a sham. For one, they use econometrics to project data. Econometrics estimates past/historical structures of the economy, and they say the future will resemble the past. Economists, including a Nobel Prize winner, have disregarded these methods for studying new policies long ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucas_critique

Secondly, even their flawed model structure uses flawed data and equation specifications to perform the estimates of the past for most countries.

Thirdly, their top-down model structure doesn't contain the operations of sectors; only the overview of GDP contribution, people employed, etc.. It's not a good tool to assess how the operations of sectors would change.
 
Last edited:

-Minsc-

Member
I'll cherry pick.

"We found that jobs where repetitive functions are required are most affected, with those such as warehouse work at imminent risk. Jobs in less structured environments and which demand compassion, creativity or social intelligence are likely to be carried out by humans for decades to come."

Lets all become social workers so we can help all the depressed people who lost their job due to automation.
 

crowbrow

Banned
So a restructuring of the job market is going to be needed. Some possible implementations are:

1. Make the standard shift to be a half shift for many of these jobs so more people can be employed.
2. Make universal basic income a standard. I don't know why many people is against this. If we're not going to have jobs people will still need money to survive or do you prefer to see people starving on the streets in your cities?
3. Create sort of community-centered participation where each person have skills which help a neighbor and in turn that neighbor returns the help with their own skills. So if a neighbor knows about plumbing then he will take care when their neighbor's plumbing issues while this neighbor might know about computers and return the favor when the neighbors computer doesn't work. Cities could structure communities based on skill mixing and then the universal basic income will be sort of justified by this community service.
4. Make people also participate in menial jobs from time to time once per week. So a small job can be done by many different people and a person can develop many different types of job skills and be more flexible on where to work.
 
So a lot of robots will opt out of a cushy factory job and opt for a life of crime instead. Who's gonna stop a 4 ton robotic crane arm from taking my Xboxes and playstations and stuff? Not me. Robot can have it.

I knew the day would come when robots chose chaotic stealvil...aaand laugh now, or sigh and look upon my post in disappointment.
 
Top Bottom