• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Dead meat : robotics

cytg111

cytg111

Lifer
Meet Flippy

http://ktla.com/2018/03/05/flippy-t...ow-cooking-at-the-caliburger-fast-food-chain/

This is going to get much much .. looking for another word than 'worse' here, cause progress yay(right?) 🙂. This is coming sooner rather than later to a wide number of professions... But hey, keep nixing welfare and foodstamp programs and funnel all the wealth to the top.

When everything is robotics and everybody is homeless and unemployed ... who is going to be buying those burgers? Hmmm... One of those chicken-egg type of questions, noone cares I suppose.
 
When it's cheaper to buy and maintain a robot to do menial jobs than it is to pay a person FAR more than the job is worth ($15 per hour at McDonalds, for example), we'll see automation show up like this a lot more.
 
cytg111 said:
Meet Flippy

http://ktla.com/2018/03/05/flippy-t...ow-cooking-at-the-caliburger-fast-food-chain/

This is going to get much much .. looking for another word than 'worse' here, cause progress yay(right?) 🙂. This is coming sooner rather than later to a wide number of professions... But hey, keep nixing welfare and foodstamp programs and funnel all the wealth to the top.

When everything is robotics and everybody is homeless and unemployed ... who is going to be buying those burgers? Hmmm... One of those chicken-egg type of questions, noone cares I suppose.
Click to expand...

It's a simple solution, but like everything with humans it is very difficult to do the right thing.

Economic activity is nothing more than the exchange of value. Of currency in our case. They make a product and sell it. Consumers buy it. Typically the same businesses create consumers via paying for labor. In this case they skip labor and make more money. We tax that money and return it to the consumer through Basic Income. We can EASILY maintain the exchange of value, we just have to be smart enough to choose to maintain liquidity. Rather than cutting our noses off to spite our faces.

Fear of change, and stupidity, are the only things that can hold us back. Unfortunately we're apes, so those things are still quite potent.
 
Fardringle said:
When it's cheaper to buy and maintain a robot to do menial jobs than it is to pay a person FAR more than the job is worth ($15 per hour at McDonalds, for example), we'll see automation show up like this a lot more.
Click to expand...

Can't wait until they automate CEO jobs. Paying those fuckers billions of dollars to destroy the American middle class, our democratic Republic and to export our IP/manufacturing expertise to foreign entities seems like paying them FAR FAR FAR FAR more than they are worth.
 
Fardringle said:
When it's cheaper to buy and maintain a robot to do menial jobs than it is to pay a person FAR more than the job is worth ($15 per hour at McDonalds, for example), we'll see automation show up like this a lot more.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately no matter how little you pay people it will always eventually become cheaper to replace them with robotics. I'm willing to bet that robotics would actually be cheaper than literal slave labor, since robots probably need less maintenance then humans.
 
Fardringle said:
When it's cheaper to buy and maintain a robot to do menial jobs than it is to pay a person FAR more than the job is worth ($15 per hour at McDonalds, for example), we'll see automation show up like this a lot more.
Click to expand...

hasnt been a grill in a mcdonalds for many years
all microwave, even easier to automate.
 
cytg111 said:
noone cares I suppose.
Click to expand...


I'm sure he does.

PeterNoone.jpg
 
SMOGZINN said:
Unfortunately no matter how little you pay people it will always eventually become cheaper to replace them with robotics. I'm willing to bet that robotics would actually be cheaper than literal slave labor, since robots probably need less maintenance then humans.
Click to expand...

They are already cheaper than economic slavery. That's why Foxconn is replacing their workers with robots by the thousands. You know, Foxconn, with labor so cheap they needed safety nets to prevent the workers from killing themselves. And that's what is already occurring. The transition to the future is NOW. It's time we update our social services to reflect realities that are about to become crushing. Our consumers can no longer depend on labor for liquidity. We must provide an answer.
 
Jaskalas said:
They are already cheaper than economic slavery. That's why Foxconn is replacing their workers with robots by the thousands. You know, Foxconn, with labor so cheap they needed safety nets to prevent the workers from killing themselves. And that's what is already occurring. The transition to the future is NOW. It's time we update our social services to reflect realities that are about to become crushing. Our consumers can no longer depend on labor for liquidity. We must provide an answer.
Click to expand...

I agree with your sentiment, but would point out that Foxconn is figurative slavery, not literal. The people working for Foxconn are paid (even if we think it is too little) and have a choice to work for Foxconn or not (even if the other choices are even worse).

I'm saying that I think that literally owning people and working them like robots, just giving them enough to survive, would actually soon be more expensive than robotics. The main things people have over robots right now is that there is a lot more of us, and we are a lot simpler to train to new jobs. Soon robotics will overtake us on both fronts.
 
Robots aren't the real issue. Who benefits is the issue- just the owners, or all of us?

Let's gaze into the crystal ball of trickle down economics for the answer... What kind of trickle down do you think you'll get when you don't have a job? If you do, how well will it pay when a huge swath of equally qualified people will do it for less?

The answers will depend, I suppose, on how much of a special libertopian snowflake you think you are...
 
WTF, $95 for a burger/drink/fries combo when they even have a robot which saves on employee costs??? Edit: Oh, not American lol
 
Jaskalas said:
They are already cheaper than economic slavery...
Click to expand...
SMOGZINN said:
I agree with your sentiment, but would point out that Foxconn is figurative slavery, not literal. The people working for Foxconn are paid (even if we think it is too little) and have a choice to work for Foxconn or not (even if the other choices are even worse).

I'm saying that I think that literally owning people and working them like robots, just giving them enough to survive, would actually soon be more expensive than robotics. The main things people have over robots right now is that there is a lot more of us, and we are a lot simpler to train to new jobs. Soon robotics will overtake us on both fronts.
Click to expand...

I used the term economic slavery. Or, in other words: Wage slavery. It was meant to be taken as figurative, not literal. Although, really, when a person has no liquidity they have no real freedom. It takes enough money over basic expenses to enable mobility and choice. American workers have been slowly losing it all since the 1970s, for various "trickle down" reasons. Now comes a total paradigm shift to speed up the process. Capitalism is evolving towards its inevitable collapse. It requires action to save it, and to protect ourselves.
 
Automation would be a wonderful thing if the robots benefited humanity instead of humans. Whenever I hear discussions about the impact and automation, the arguments are always about how new jobs will open up to replace the ones being automated. No one ever seems to discuss how automation could lead to us simply working fewer hours.
 
Jaskalas said:
I used the term economic slavery. Or, in other words: Wage slavery. It was meant to be taken as figurative, not literal. Although, really, when a person has no liquidity they have no real freedom. It takes enough money over basic expenses to enable mobility and choice. American workers have been slowly losing it all since the 1970s, for various "trickle down" reasons. Now comes a total paradigm shift to speed up the process. Capitalism is evolving towards its inevitable collapse. It requires action to save it, and to protect ourselves.
Click to expand...

Well, yeh, but it won't collapse far enough to affect the lifestyles of the people at the tippy-top. I mean, the GOP has to believe that to do things the way they do. They'd act differently if they thought they'd end up like the Russian aristocracy 100 years ago. Other than that, the message is pretty clear to anybody who cares to see it- ..-. -.-- --. -- That's an F, a Y, a G and an M...
 
Jaskalas said:
I used the term economic slavery. Or, in other words: Wage slavery. It was meant to be taken as figurative, not literal. Although, really, when a person has no liquidity they have no real freedom. It takes enough money over basic expenses to enable mobility and choice. American workers have been slowly losing it all since the 1970s, for various "trickle down" reasons. Now comes a total paradigm shift to speed up the process. Capitalism is evolving towards its inevitable collapse. It requires action to save it, and to protect ourselves.
Click to expand...
How do you propose we save ourselves? Socialism?
 
Doc Savage Fan said:
How do you propose we save ourselves? Socialism?
Click to expand...

This isn't black & white, either/or. We already live in a mixed economy. If it needs to be more mixed to serve the welfare of the people then we have the right to make it that way, libertopian delusions aside.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top