The robots are coming

masterwilde

Raspberry_Queen wrote: »

What jobs do you think are safe? Those in the medical professions?
Which STEM jobs will be safe in the future? Someone will have to fix the robots.



But we can't do that; there's simply not enough land. There are 66 million people in the UK, and 59,000,000 acres of land. It takes 15 acres of land to feed a human on a conventional diet (0.25 acres on a plant based diet, but people refuse to do that). The remaining land that is suitable for self-sufficient living (in my area, the most fertile land with the best, most untouched soil), is being destroyed by hundreds of thousands of new houses being built.

So, the powers that be have centralised everything to ensure that we can't be self-sufficient. We must be reliant on money. Really, all humans need is that 0.25 acres of good land, some seeds and tools to farm it, and they wouldn't need much else.

Its rubbish that it takes 15 acres to feed a human. thats a stupid government statistic that has been proved false by hundreds of small holders.

motorguy

PasturesNew wrote: »

So the population needs to start reducing by 15 million pretty quick.

Can I suggest some candidates?

motorguy

masterwilde wrote: »

Capita has revealed it will cut 2000 jobs due to robotic automation.

Capita has also stated that IT is the fourth revolution, following that of the industrial revolution.

Over time its obvious that robotics will replace workers, along with IT. Just look at the car industry, how about the clothing industry, or part of the mail industry (internal mail sorters hardly exist now).

Those who think it will be rosy are not looking to the future or the past

2,000 is a relatively small percentage of staff for them.


Capita have 70,000 staff (or they had when I worked for them - probably more now).


Whilst roles could be removed because of automation, they'll hardly cut jobs - even IF they were in a position to do this next year, natural attrition would cover the most of it - and simply moving people in to other roles.


Apart from anything - if the most mundane repetitive jobs can be done by "robots", it frees people up to do more productive things.

motorguy

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

They have replaced an awful lot of jobs.

To take just one example - ie in office jobs (the field I know best personally). Back when I started work every single letter had to be typed individually. Roll forward some years - and these days most of the letters we receive from firms are "standard" ones customised just enough that it's our name/address at the top of them. No-one has had to type that letter out individually. No-one has stopped and thought about the information in it being applicable to us (and us only) at a personal level.

Offices no longer have huge amounts of files. Bingo - that was the jobs of filing clerks gone then.

Yup - however the people weren't replaced by "robots". That's what I was talking about as cringeworthy. Automation always happens.


I don't see this as a big problem - just frees people up to do more interesting, challenging work.

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Employers just don't need nearly as many people to do jobs as they used to - and it is only going to get worse (ie with the double whammy of fewer jobs and more people needing a job). A lot of the unskilled jobs have gone in my lifetime and I don't think there will be many jobs at all at "my" (intermediate) level left soon. Those with professional careers are probably not that far behind us.

Personally - if I were at the start of my working life now - I would be distinctly disturbed at being expected to do things like working in an office "factory" (rather than a "proper" office with pretty leisured/civilised way of doing things) or work in the "gig" economy and not even be sure from one week to the next how much I would earn and just who was supposed to cover the cost of my annual leave and any sick leave. That's now - ie 2016. If I had to start my worklife now - I already strongly suspect my only realistic option for myself personally would be "back to the land" in a series of self-sufficient communes. I think we'll be very surprised at the calibre of the people that would also have to think along the same lines in, say, 10 years time.

Sorry, but this is all tinfoil hat stuff. You're taking a very small potential issue and extrapolating it out to some doomsday scenario.


I've worked in IT all my day - nearly 30 years now - and seen massive automation and changes. Yet companies still have loads of staff - they just done have them doing the mundane, banal stuff any more. Surely this is a good thing?

motorguy

DavidF wrote: »

Last time I walked inside my own local Barclays bank I was met by one human who directed everyone I saw entering the place (myself included) to one of the many machines to complete our "banking". There was one other human worker (visible anyway) who was behind the traditional desk and she was dealing with a long queue of people who I can only assume refused or could not complete their transactions.
Every time we go supermarket shopping you see less and less workers on tills....our local morrison's for example has one employee tasked with overseeing 10 self scanning tills. This is replicated in any of the rival supermarkets that we have visited.
So yes the threatened computer/robotic revolution HAS taken place and IS removing jobs done by humans.
There is no real way of stopping this march. Youngsters should be focused on careers that they can envisage will still be required in 40 years time. Builders/Trades ect will always be required. Drivers are the next huge target...and the UK has promised to lead the way in the driverless cars/vans ect. Train drivers will soon be gone. I can also envisage a time when even police officers will be replaced by AI ....as said even lawyers and judges ect "could" be fairly easily replaced by automation.
Finally if the robots/automation doesn't make you redundant then watch out for globalisation where someone earning <$1 per day can do your job equally well ....it's going to come down to weather your employer likes your smile lol.

And this is all great news - people don't have to waste their lives in mundane jobs scanning cans of peas for a living.


Maybe people should embrace that - I know I am.


And globalisation isn't that big a shakes - many companies who have offshored work are bringing it back to nearshore.

motorguy

AshleyBurf wrote: »

It's true that in certain industries will be taken over by robots. The creative industries won't be but things like driving trucks will be self driving, self driving taxis, cleaning may eventually be done by robots. I would certainly take a cleaning and cooking robot at home!

We've already a cleaning robot at home.


Every night at 02:00 our Neato robotic hoover starts up and hoovers up the kitchen / snug and hall (we've two retrievers so lots of dog hairs after their in). You can also get floor washing ones, and now I see you can get grass cutting ones.


I'm all for all of those. Our FIL cuts our lawns but when he stops doing it (hes retired and enjoys it), then we'll definitely go down the robotic route - not wasting two hours of my precious spare time cutting grass.

Ozzuk

This kind of theory has been spouted for as long as I can remember, I'm sure like a broken clock it will be right at some point.

I wouldn't put it down as something to worry about though. There is a growing train of thought to bring in a 'living wage' which in theory could take millions of people out of the job market. Or if that doesn't come in, maybe we'll get a war or two to cull the population.

I work in an industry that has sites filled with hundreds of people where there used to be thousands, so it's already happened to a large extent. The job market will continue to evolve, people will evolve with it, I'd worry more about Trump blowing everyone up.

spadoosh

Ozzuk wrote: »

This kind of theory has been spouted for as long as I can remember, I'm sure like a broken clock it will be right at some point.

I wouldn't put it down as something to worry about though. There is a growing train of thought to bring in a 'living wage' which in theory could take millions of people out of the job market. Or if that doesn't come in, maybe we'll get a war or two to cull the population.

I work in an industry that has sites filled with hundreds of people where there used to be thousands, so it's already happened to a large extent. The job market will continue to evolve, people will evolve with it, I'd worry more about Trump blowing everyone up.

The 'living wage' is ultimately what needs to happen though to allow for more automation. You dont get 1000 taxi drivers evolving to become robotics engineers. The job market is evolving in to something that doesnt exist anymore. The crux lies in the switch over of when it becomes acceptable for someone to earn a 'living wage' whilst not (having to) working. Are say the doctors who dont yet have automation replacing their job going ot be happy doing thier job knowing theyre paying for people who dont do any job.

At what point do people start getting paid to not work?

DomRavioli

Wayne_O_Mac wrote: »

Because Brexit hasn't happened yet?

I clearly meant the referendum vote. Apologies for working long hours, being visually impaired and severely stressed. Who put 50p in you.

Ozzuk

spadoosh wrote: »

The 'living wage' is ultimately what needs to happen though to allow for more automation. You dont get 1000 taxi drivers evolving to become robotics engineers. The job market is evolving in to something that doesnt exist anymore. The crux lies in the switch over of when it becomes acceptable for someone to earn a 'living wage' whilst not (having to) working. Are say the doctors who dont yet have automation replacing their job going ot be happy doing thier job knowing theyre paying for people who dont do any job.

At what point do people start getting paid to not work?

The living wage is an extremely interesting concept for discussion - I didn't want to take the thread of on a tangent though. Maybe a new thread needed! The Swiss voted on it recently (and the people have the power to bring in new laws like this based on voting numbers) but it failed the public vote.

Just to add, the Scots are currently looking into it I believe.