Automation: What kind of trouble will it be?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Monsterboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Automation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of automation on the workforce, particularly concerning the potential for mass unemployment in low-skill and medium-skill labor sectors. Participants explore the balance between job displacement due to automation and the emergence of new job types, as well as the historical context of technological disruption.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express concern that many jobs will be automated, leaving only those requiring human creativity and language skills, questioning how soon mass unemployment might occur.
  • One participant, with extensive software development experience, argues that automation has historically not led to job displacement but rather to workforce expansion, citing economic factors that influence automation decisions.
  • Another participant notes that while certain repetitive jobs may be easily replaced by AI, new job types will likely emerge to complement technological advancements.
  • A participant working in automation and machine learning suggests that while technology and population grow geometrically, humans will adapt to changes, leading to a different lifestyle rather than a negative outcome.
  • Some participants reference TED talks and articles to provide additional perspectives on the topic, indicating a variety of viewpoints on the future of work in relation to automation.
  • One participant mentions the role of data generation in automation, suggesting that humans may be compensated for their contributions to training AI systems.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the future impact of automation on employment. There are multiple competing views regarding the extent of job displacement, the emergence of new roles, and the overall economic implications of automation.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the historical context of technological disruption, suggesting that predictions about the future of work may be inherently uncertain. The discussion reflects varying assumptions about the relationship between automation, job displacement, and economic factors.

Monsterboy
Messages
305
Reaction score
96
I read that a lot jobs done by people today will end up getting automated in the near future and that only those jobs that require human creativity and language etc that cannot be easily replicated by AI will remain. If this is true how far away are we from mass unemployment in the low-skill and medium-skill labor sector ?

I don't how much of this is hype and how much is not, i would like responses from people working in the AI, automation fields.

Regards,
Monsterboy
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
Monsterboy said:
I read that a lot jobs done by people today will end up getting automated in the near future and that only those jobs that require human creativity and language etc that cannot be easily replicated by AI will remain. If this is true how far away are we from mass unemployment in the low-skill and medium-skill labor sector ?

I don't how much of this is hype and how much is not, i would like responses from people working in the AI, automation fields.

Regards,
Monsterboy
I've been developing software for over four decades and I don't know either.
There have been many times when the software I developed looked as though it would certainly cause jobs to be displaced - but it never has. It every case, the company or the government agency ended up taking on more work and actually expanded its work force.
Machines often take over the simple, repetitive, dangerous, or otherwise menial tasks. But certainly there are some in the work force that can do little more than that. Part of the issue is economics. McDonalds could replace more workers with automation, but there is no cost benefit. And people are still able to adapt better than machines - they usually have a better sense of value in unexpected situations.
And even as the effect of displacement occurs, it is happening only as more products and services become available at less cost. So people seem to have a perpetual economic out. They have to be paid in order for there to be demand for the products and services they produce. Still, their contribution to that productivity could approach zero asymptotically.

Perhaps this explains why there is a separate group of people, the owners of production automation, that are doing so much better than the rest of us.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and Monsterboy
Automation: What kind of trouble will it be ?

We're 250 years into the Industrial Revolution. And now you're asking the question?

It's been continually disruptive since then, and I think it's fair that nobody in 1760 would be able to have predicted where we are today. Why should we be able to do any better?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ISamson, PeroK, Monsterboy and 1 other person
I am not working in the AI and automation field, but I'm kind of interested when it comes to these subjects. While the workforce is far from getting completely replaced by AI, the sectors you have mentioned are the ones that can easily be replaced because of the nature of their tasks — repetitive and can be more efficiently done by AI. Jobs evolve overtime, while there are jobs that will be replaced, new types of jobs will emerge in the future to complement the advancement of the technology — marketers found a way to maximize the usage of internet hence the emergence of digital marketing.

Here's a few of those jobs that will likely be replaced by automation in the near future, as I've read on this blog: It's Time to Make Way for Smart Robots in your Industry (I also posted this one on the self-driving cars thread).
 
I do automation and work occasionally with machine learning.

I think the problem is that both technology and population grow geometrically.

I think we'll have a serious problem, but humans will solve it. I mean, life will just be different, that's not good or bad. I think we'll consider those people to be lazy and have everything done for them, but they'll have new obstacles and ways of life. We have shelter every single day, water flows straight to our shelter, food is for all practical purposes endless, and we don't worry much about predators. Automation has killed the caveman lifestyle, are we lazier than they are?
 
The company i work for, creates smart cameras. They require LOTS of data from humans, many people work to feed the neural networks with data.
We have a factory, that has many human workers.

About not so near future, futurism.com had one interesting article saying time is money, facebook for example creates lots of profit for we spend time on it. So probably, humans could be payed for generating useful data, share ads, things like that.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
...I think it's fair that nobody in 1760 would be able to have predicted where we are today.
I would agree with that...

See here.
See here.
 

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
6K
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K