The future of employment

[Riedquat]

Just now, MarkG said:

The point is that I can sit around playing computer games while my robots do all the work I need done. Like running the greenhouses and picking the strawberries.

Employment is going away, and it's never coming back. Because who'll want to work for someone else when they can have dozens of robots working for them?

And the point of all of that is what, exactly? Building complex robots when we've got human beings sitting around who could be doing that stuff? What a waste! How absurd! It makes sense for tasks like bomb disposal but not a great deal else. The problem you've got is "for someone else", we should ideally be working both for ourselves and whoever else needs what we do (since no-one is going to be able to be good at everything, or have the time).

This is why I find automation part of an unpleasant vision of a not too distant dystopia. My idea of a great future isn't to be the humans in Wall-E.

[MarkG]

Just now, Riedquat said:

And the point of all of that is what, exactly?

To be able to live, rather than work?

Humans aren't meant to be crammed into cubicles spending their lives making profits for others. They're meant to live in small tribes and build a better future for themselves.

And that's exactly where automation is taking us. At least the ones who survive the upcoming wars when everyone figures out that the massive population growth of the industrial era is a problem in the post-industrial era.

[Riedquat]

Automation isn't going to build us a better future, it's going to turn us into useless lumps of flesh utterly incapable of doing the most basic things for ourselves.

Being stuck in cubicles (which I'd take over the open plan crap I've got) working for others is a problem but automation isn't a solution for that, it's a different problem.

In the tribe everyone had a useful role for the tribe, and when it works it largely does because everyone contributed, and thus helped and supported each other, and could also gain satisfaction from their contribution. That's all been lost in modern employment, but automation is just going to kill off what little bit remains. It's just a pity that the tribal approach isn't great for things like improving medicine or having enough robustness to not be put at great risk of famine thanks to a bad year or two.

[winkie]

1 hour ago, MarkG said:

To be able to live, rather than work?

Humans aren't meant to be crammed into cubicles spending their lives making profits for others. They're meant to live in small tribes and build a better future for themselves.

And that's exactly where automation is taking us. At least the ones who survive the upcoming wars when everyone figures out that the massive population growth of the industrial era is a problem in the post-industrial era.

Many professionals including new graduates would prefer to work part-time.....work part-time for money and the rest of the time working for self doing work wouldn't then have to pay for because have more own time to do what needs to be done and learn how to do different jobs that require doing......most jobs are there to make stuff and provide services, could we actually do more of it ourselves with a bit of mechanical help......what if we over time decide we do not want so much stuff and can do more servicing ourselves saving ourselves money, like we are already starting to do without ourselves realising helping to save others money.....

[MarkG]

It's a pretty good bet that no-one's going to be in my tribe unless there's a use for them.

AI is already at the forefront of medical improvements--literally, there are companies using AIs to find new drugs to test--and there's no reason to worry about famine when you have robot farmers working for you.

And you can't stop it. Restricting automation will just ensure your country becomes a backwater until it's taken over by its new robot overlords.

[MarkG]

6 minutes ago, winkie said:

what if we over time decide we do not want so much stuff and can do more servicing ourselves saving ourselves money, like we are already starting to do without ourselves realising helping to save others money.....

Yes. There's a huge investment in preventing people from doing things for themselves. Don't grow your own food, buy it from me! Don't make your own clothes, buy the latest fashion! Don't repair that thing that just broke, buy a new one!

Because the fat-cats are entirely reliant on convincing people to do stuff for the fat-cats rather than doing it for themselves. The more people realize they don't have to buy stuff, the faster the economy implodes.

And automation makes doing things yourself easier and easier.

[winkie]

Cows that can milk themselves.....supermarkets without any employees on shop floor.....call centers operated by voice recognition robots....driver-less trains, then cars.....machines that plow, plant, feed, pick and pack.....accountants, GPs, and many other service providers, AI and computer programmes could quite easily replace many repetitive desk jobs, even talking therapy......real person jobs will be more valued, I say about time. 

[winkie]

7 minutes ago, MarkG said:

Yes. There's a huge investment in preventing people from doing things for themselves. Don't grow your own food, buy it from me! Don't make your own clothes, buy the latest fashion! Don't repair that thing that just broke, buy a new one!

Because the fat-cats are entirely reliant on convincing people to do stuff for the fat-cats rather than doing it for themselves. The more people realize they don't have to buy stuff, the faster the economy implodes.

And automation makes doing things yourself easier and easier.

Also if we all do more ourselves there will be fewer taxes paid.....it would be preferable to some that we work get paid, pay our taxes and rents, and use our wages to pay others to do things for us so providing more jobs and taxes......perhaps we should start taxing machines and robots?

[Arpeggio]

Robots aren't paid wages that become disposable income and robots don't have consumer wants or even needs......so........hypothetically, if all jobs were done by robots that don't have spending money or the want to buy anything, where would the money and consumer demand come from that requires robots? lol

[PeanutButter]

Read this recently, would recommend. The inevitable end for sentient robots?

https://www.waterstones.com/book/sea-of-rust/c-robert-cargill/9781473212794

[GregBowman]

10 hours ago, chronyx said:

Maybe they could learn to code

Oh no wait, all the ex-journos got there first! 

?

[regprentice]

On 02/12/2019 at 14:03, GregBowman said:

However as you say middle manager job in a Leadenhall St Insurance co.......

Those jobs have already been offshored.

I worked for a bank with 130,000 employees 10 years ago, that's dropped to 70,000 now and still falling. Probably another 30000 staff in India and Poland.

The really challenge for these banks are that their  new 'digital challengers' typically have have barely a few hundred employees. 

Monese has 131 staff and over 1mn customers, with 3000 joining a day

Starling has 279 staff and 450,000 customer accounts

I genuinely can't see RBS, Lloyds, Barclays disappearing overnight from a position of dominance. But then I remember thinking the same about Blackberry, Woolworths, Polaroid, Palm, Orange, Kodak etc etc 

[Riedquat]

On 02/12/2019 at 18:31, MarkG said:

It's a pretty good bet that no-one's going to be in my tribe unless there's a use for them.

AI is already at the forefront of medical improvements--literally, there are companies using AIs to find new drugs to test--and there's no reason to worry about famine when you have robot farmers working for you.

Oh, it has its upsides, such as medical advances, but we've not had to worry about famine in the UK for over a century. Robot workers are not necessary. The rather damaging level of modern, advanced high tech farming we have is only necessary due to the ridiculous number of people we've got (and still doesn't come close to sufficient without import), and is pretty damaging too.

Quote

And you can't stop it. Restricting automation will just ensure your country becomes a backwater until it's taken over by its new robot overlords.

Yes, it's inevitable. That's why I find any plausible vision of the future outright depressing. There are no grounds for hope. This is why I'm such a miserable sod, I can only see ever-bleaker dystopia stretching before me, and people desperately pushing on towards it.

[spyguy]

10 hours ago, regprentice said:

Those jobs have already been offshored.

I worked for a bank with 130,000 employees 10 years ago, that's dropped to 70,000 now and still falling. Probably another 30000 staff in India and Poland.

The really challenge for these banks are that their  new 'digital challengers' typically have have barely a few hundred employees. 

Monese has 131 staff and over 1mn customers, with 3000 joining a day

Starling has 279 staff and 450,000 customer accounts

I genuinely can't see RBS, Lloyds, Barclays disappearing overnight from a position of dominance. But then I remember thinking the same about Blackberry, Woolworths, Polaroid, Palm, Orange, Kodak etc etc 

Not banking, and a pure software enterprise but ....

https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2014/02/19/1777102/this-is-nuts-whens-the-crash-11/

That’s Facebook buying Whatsapp, a (good) international messaging app with 450m users, for $16bn. Half a Twitter. More, $19bn, if you count RSUs, which are arguably the most stunning thing here. Whatsapp has 55 employees. The next most stunning thing is that it’s only $4bn in cash. Facebook shareholders already left Mark Zuckerberg in complete control. They’ve now handed him currency.

Whatsapp is a worldwide enterprise. Yes, it relies on mobile phones for its transport and hosting so not a huge deal of infrastructure (IIRC correctly they ran about 50 odd servers, worldwide) but .....

BT currently has 105k employees.

For various reason, good n n bad, UK bet heavily on services, mainly financial.

Finance, by its very nature, is easily digitised.

I have an on going pitch that London/South is in massive problems as its economy was a single bet of financial services - pretty much every town I used to visit 20 years ago - and I visit a lot - south of MK, the top 3 employees were always finsec.

I still visit these towns and theyve lost ~80% of employees.

These arent big swinging dicks. These are GCSE passes in Maths n English, 20 years, promoted to middle manager on 50k. These popel are lucky to get a job on the tills after theyve laid off.

The lucky ones will have been 55+ and can survive til pension kicks ins.

However, there house will only be worth ~4x what a 30yo in the town can afford, so well under half what they think.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[stuckmojo]

12 minutes ago, spyguy said:

Not banking, and a pure software enterprise but ....

https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2014/02/19/1777102/this-is-nuts-whens-the-crash-11/

That’s Facebook buying Whatsapp, a (good) international messaging app with 450m users, for $16bn. Half a Twitter. More, $19bn, if you count RSUs, which are arguably the most stunning thing here. Whatsapp has 55 employees. The next most stunning thing is that it’s only $4bn in cash. Facebook shareholders already left Mark Zuckerberg in complete control. They’ve now handed him currency.

Whatsapp is a worldwide enterprise. Yes, it relies on mobile phones for its transport and hosting so not a huge deal of infrastructure (IIRC correctly they ran about 50 odd servers, worldwide) but .....

BT currently has 105k employees.

For various reason, good n n bad, UK bet heavily on services, mainly financial.

Finance, by its very nature, is easily digitised.

I have an on going pitch that London/South is in massive problems as its economy was a single bet of financial services - pretty much every town I used to visit 20 years ago - and I visit a lot - south of MK, the top 3 employees were always finsec.

I still visit these towns and theyve lost ~80% of employees.

These arent big swinging dicks. These are GCSE passes in Maths n English, 20 years, promoted to middle manager on 50k. These popel are lucky to get a job on the tills after theyve laid off.

The lucky ones will have been 55+ and can survive til pension kicks ins.

However, there house will only be worth ~4x what a 30yo in the town can afford, so well under half what they think.

 

 

 

 

 

 

unless they can sell quickly. but they won't. As they have pissed up the equity and still believe in the property ladder utopia. 

I see that in the North East. I want to move to Tynemouth. London prices for average wages below £20k. Ageing population and huge support for the Labour candidate. The only happy people are those lucky to inherit quickly and currently live miles away in a Barratt casket. 

[spyguy]

12 minutes ago, stuckmojo said:

unless they can sell quickly. but they won't. As they have pissed up the equity and still believe in the property ladder utopia. 

I see that in the North East. I want to move to Tynemouth. London prices for average wages below £20k. Ageing population and huge support for the Labour candidate. The only happy people are those lucky to inherit quickly and currently live miles away in a Barratt casket. 

I like tynemouth.

Quick check.

https://www.home.co.uk/guides/house_prices_report.htm?location=ne29&all=1

Standard northern price chart - more than doubles 1999-2004.

Flat since, so down 30%ish in real prices.

Transaction numbers collapse in 08, continues at 30% of last 40 years average.

Look of noise on exoensive detached, pointing to very low transaction.

Same as scabby. Have a look at my liquidt post in y n humb forum.

Just put in offers at 30% off asking.

In the 10 years since 08, 50% of the 65+ will have died.

 

[winkie]

11 hours ago, regprentice said:

Those jobs have already been offshored.

I worked for a bank with 130,000 employees 10 years ago, that's dropped to 70,000 now and still falling. Probably another 30000 staff in India and Poland.

The really challenge for these banks are that their  new 'digital challengers' typically have have barely a few hundred employees. 

Monese has 131 staff and over 1mn customers, with 3000 joining a day

Starling has 279 staff and 450,000 customer accounts

I genuinely can't see RBS, Lloyds, Barclays disappearing overnight from a position of dominance. But then I remember thinking the same about Blackberry, Woolworths, Polaroid, Palm, Orange, Kodak etc etc 

The future is bright, the future is orange.

[hotblack42]

11 hours ago, regprentice said:

Those jobs have already been offshored.

I worked for a bank with 130,000 employees 10 years ago, that's dropped to 70,000 now and still falling. Probably another 30000 staff in India and Poland.

The really challenge for these banks are that their  new 'digital challengers' typically have have barely a few hundred employees. 

Monese has 131 staff and over 1mn customers, with 3000 joining a day

Starling has 279 staff and 450,000 customer accounts

I genuinely can't see RBS, Lloyds, Barclays disappearing overnight from a position of dominance. But then I remember thinking the same about Blackberry, Woolworths, Polaroid, Palm, Orange, Kodak etc etc 

Pan Am.  To fail from such dominance in 60s & 70s was truly shocking.  It was probably there in the balance sheet though.  Many firms are rotten oaks.

[Riedquat]

51 minutes ago, hotblack42 said:

Pan Am.  To fail from such dominance in 60s & 70s was truly shocking.  It was probably there in the balance sheet though.  Many firms are rotten oaks.

Thought it was Lockerbie that pretty much finished Pan Am off.

[Social Justice League]

The big American tech companies are pushing for a universal citizens income, as they can see what's coming.

I agree with what has already been said on here, conventional employment is going out of fashion fast, as most 'jobs' are non jobs these days, that automation could do quicker, cheaper and more efficently then a dumb human animal.

So obvious what is coming, yet we still has halfwits pushing 9 to 5's as a viable way of life.....lol.

Hilarious nonsense in the coming 2020's.

Edited December 5, 2019 by Social Justice League
typo

[Odakyu-sen]

On 02/12/2019 at 23:45, Riedquat said:

Still trying to figure out what the point of all this automation is. Doesn't seem to be doing much to make the world a better place to live in, more the opposite. Alas people are attracted to it like (allegorical? is that the right word?) magpies to shiny things.

The purpose of automation is to relieve humans from dull, repetative, mundane tasks such as supermarket checkout, driving, monitoring, picking, harvesting, meat processing, routine testing, data gathering, assembly lines, that sort of thing. 

The issues are: what to do with the workers you no longer require? 

Let people do the interesting work. Let the robots do the repetitive tasks. 

Edited December 6, 2019 by Odakyu-sen

[scottbeard]

On 04/12/2019 at 23:29, Riedquat said:

Oh, it has its upsides, such as medical advances, but we've not had to worry about famine in the UK for over a century. Robot workers are not necessary. The rather damaging level of modern, advanced high tech farming we have is only necessary due to the ridiculous number of people we've got (and still doesn't come close to sufficient without import), and is pretty damaging too.

Yes, it's inevitable. That's why I find any plausible vision of the future outright depressing. There are no grounds for hope. This is why I'm such a miserable sod, I can only see ever-bleaker dystopia stretching before me, and people desperately pushing on towards it.

Interestingly whilst the world of work becomes more automated and digital, in their free time people are returning to some much more tangible and (one could say) old fashioned pursuits. Vinyl records are bad, the great British bake off has sparked home baking again, cycling as both a means of transport and a leisure pursuit is booming.

Arguably that’s the right way around too - you want the hard work to be done by robots, but if you choose to bake a cake rather than buy one presumably that’s because you ENJOY that work.

What is lost though is the pride that comes from a job well done. Switching On a robot doesn’t give that.

[scottbeard]

Previous post should say vinyl records are BACK not BAD - autocorrect error. 

[MarkG]

On 05/12/2019 at 17:37, Social Justice League said:

The big American tech companies are pushing for a universal citizens income, as they can see what's coming.

'UBI' is, at best, a vain attempt to maintain the status quo in a world where it makes no sense. And, at worst, an attempt to gain complete control over a population who will become utterly reliant on the government for their survival.

Why will I need money if I have a bunch of robots to do anything I want done?

Most of 'big tech' is employment for the sake of employment. Google is a huge company that serves ads to people, and who's going to need ads if they have a bunch of robots to do anything they want done?

Automation and AI is the end of the industrial system. Let it die.

[MarkG]

On 04/12/2019 at 17:29, Riedquat said:

There are no grounds for hope. This is why I'm such a miserable sod, I can only see ever-bleaker dystopia stretching before me, and people desperately pushing on towards it.

Why would you be miserable about a future where you have swarms of AIs and robots to do anything you want?

The dystopian future is the one where only the 1% have AIs and robots. And that's where trying to restrict it gets us.