On the issue of jobs....

[BoberFett]

Wait so when building things out of steel and glass and all sorts of heavy materials.... people actually use MACHINES?!!!????????!!!!!! SAY IT ISNT SO!!!

Tesla's assembly line should look like Fords from 1914... which of course should have looked like 1814...

Better yet, I want my 100k car to cost 100 billion because each one is made entirely by hand like a samarai sword....screw interchangeable parts!

Alarmists like you lost your mind from the very first time mankind figured out you could harness a windmill to do the work of 30-40 people or that a steam shovel could replace a few hundred. "OMG!!!!!! This industrial revolution thing is out of control!!!! No one will have a job ever again!!!!! Gangs of a couple hundred dudes should still be hauling stones up dirt ramps rather than use one of those evil crane things!!!!"

I bet if we went all the way back to the stone age we could achive 100% full employment as hunter-gatherers.

Were you dropped on your head? I don't mean as a child, I mean today.

 

[Moonbeam]

I really need to sit down sometime and organize my thoughts on this. It would end up being a rather lengthy paper.

The facts are that it's labor all the way down. Every cent of everything you buy ultimately goes to labor. While I disagree with his application of some of his ideas, Marx is correct about the concept of the labor theory of value. No matter what you buy, 100% of the value of that item is based on the value added throughout the process by labor. An unused raw good has zero value. It's just minerals in the ground. It's not until you pay someone to mine ore out of the ground, someone to smelt it into usable metals, someone to craft it into a finished good, someone to transport it to the store, and someone to put it on the shelf does that item have value. But labor doesn't have to be done by humans, and an ever increasing portion of the labor pie is being contributed by machines

Mining technology has eliminated lots of mining jobs. Robots have been manufacturing our goods for some time. Now they're picking, packing and shipping orders. Fields that think they're safe from machines because their jobs are "creative" will continue to be cut back, if not eliminated. I just watched a video about machines that do quality control on auto paint jobs. A subjective job now being done by a robot. Machines will continue to become more and more capable, and I think within my lifetime (I'm almost 40) we'll see a majority of the world's work output being done by machines.

What then? Can the world really support a billion poets? A billion musicians? A billion painters and sculptors? Even if they don't need to do it to live, part of the drive of being an artist is recognition of one's work. And if there are a billion of you, do we all have an audience of one? Idle hands are the devil's plaything. Will we all live a life of enlightened luxury? Will it be like Wall-E, a bunch of gluttonous mounds of fat watching TV? Will it be a lawless, hedonistic culture where we all try to get away with as much as possible just to entertain ourselves? Even if you solve the problems of supplying the entire worlds' needs, there's something about labor which makes us human.

It's going to be an interesting future, for sure.

My point is that all those robots are owned privately with the efficiencies of robotic labor going to into fewer hands. Henry Ford maybe turned people into robots, but they earned enough to buy his cars. Maybe those workers at Tesla do too, but that's not many cars. He sells to a shrinking number of folk who have the money to support that kind of purchase.

The only way we can have billions of artists is if they don't have to depend on art to feed themselves. We will need, it seems to me, some kind of paradigm shift where the savings provided by machine labor goes into feeding people. Scarcity creates greed and abundance magnanimity. The world would be very different, I think, if people didn't have to compete with others to survive.

And if you do work because you love it, it's not work it's play.

 

[Moonbeam]

Were you dropped on your head? I don't mean as a child, I mean today.

His knee went off before his brain processed what you said. Folk who are grinding axes are quick on the draw with throwing them.

 

[OverVolt]

This thread needs less moonbean.

Anyway, technology isn't going to save us. Its a belief not based on fact, at all. You can't extrapolate 30 years and just assume those scientist wizards will fix everything.

We've had scientific progress for a long time, and we're still on an unsustainable collision course.

Per moonbeams privately owned machines, that would lead to rampant (even worse than now) wealth inequality which always precedes a huge economic/cultural shock.

 

[Zaap]

Were you dropped on your head? I don't mean as a child, I mean today.

Says the nut whining about industrial robots.

 

[Moonbeam]

OverVolt: This thread needs less moonbean.


M: Fuck yourself, I started the thread.

O: Anyway, technology isn't going to save us. Its a belief not based on fact, at all. You can't extrapolate 30 years and just assume those scientist wizards will fix everything.

We've had scientific progress for a long time, and we're still on an unsustainable collision course.

M: Thread premise: scientific progress is accelerating our pace to collision

O: Per moonbeams privately owned machines, that would lead to rampant (even worse than now) wealth inequality which always precedes a huge economic/cultural shock.

M: Moonbeam suggests that private owned machines does exactly what you describe implying that public ownership may be necessary.

 

[BoberFett]

Says the nut whining about industrial robots.

Who's whining about them?

Read what I wrote again, and see if you can find me whining anywhere in there.

Then go give yourself a swirlie, you putz.

 

[OverVolt]

OverVolt: This thread needs less moonbean.


M: Fuck yourself, I started the thread.

O: Anyway, technology isn't going to save us. Its a belief not based on fact, at all. You can't extrapolate 30 years and just assume those scientist wizards will fix everything.

We've had scientific progress for a long time, and we're still on an unsustainable collision course.

M: Thread premise: scientific progress is accelerating our pace to collision

O: Per moonbeams privately owned machines, that would lead to rampant (even worse than now) wealth inequality which always precedes a huge economic/cultural shock.

M: Moonbeam suggests that private owned machines does exactly what you describe implying that public ownership may be necessary.

Wellll then carry on

 

[Moonbeam]

Says the nut whining about industrial robots.

Things went this way:

TheSlamma
put down the Hollywood movies and go outside and experience robotics and AI.. it's as pathetic as it was 10 years ago

Boberfett: You're joking, right? I suppose you're one of those numskulls who think robots have to look and act human?

Here you go, numskull, a bunch of dumb robots that haven't advanced in 10 years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_lfxPI5ObM

The darling of the auto industry. I see a couple of humans hanging around. It shouldn't take long to eliminate them.

In short TheSlamma said that the robot situation hadn't progressed in 10 years to which Boberfett gave a video showing the technical prowess of current robot technology in a Tesla factory suggesting it's just the beginning of eliminating people from production lines. The implication clearly is that since most of the world bets by on manual production of goods, most people are going to experience a rough ride.

So this is what I read in your post:

Zaap: Wait so when building things out of steel and glass and all sorts of heavy materials.... people actually use MACHINES?!!!????????!!!!!! SAY IT ISNT SO!!!

M: Using a tool to work with steel and glass is nothing at all like replacing the person using the tool with the tool itself

Z: Tesla's assembly line should look like Fords from 1914... which of course should have looked like 1814...

M: Incoherent unrelated rambling. Ford made cars the average worker could afford, Tesla makes some cars for well off people, and with all of the folk unemployed in the auto industry not being able to buy much at all.

Z: Better yet, I want my 100k car to cost 100 billion because each one is made entirely by hand like a samarai sword....screw interchangeable parts!

M: How about he doesn't want to see millions of people out of work.

Z: Alarmists like you lost your mind from the very first time mankind figured out you could harness a windmill to do the work of 30-40 people or that a steam shovel could replace a few hundred. "OMG!!!!!! This industrial revolution thing is out of control!!!! No one will have a job ever again!!!!! Gangs of a couple hundred dudes should still be hauling stones up dirt ramps rather than use one of those evil crane things!!!!"

M: Try not to be so alarmed that some folk can see we have an employment problem. You sound perfectly crazy. One would think he came after your nuts with a hatchet.

Z: I bet if we went all the way back to the stone age we could achive 100% full employment as hunter-gatherers.

M: Maybe about 20 of us.

 

[Moonbeam]

Wellll then carry on

Thank you. Please now mentally edit-out the 'go fuck yourself' part of my post.

 

[Zaap]

Who's whining about them?

Read what I wrote again, and see if you can find me whining anywhere in there.

Then go give yourself a swirlie, you putz.

On the scale of nutjobs when it comes to this subject, you're actually in the grand company of none other than Moonbeam!

You were whining at someone as if an industrial robot having progressed in a decade like any other technology is something to get bent out of shape over.

By the way, I now remember YOU were the nutbag whining for a few thousand telephone switchboard jobs vs. the entire modern age of communication that's made infinite more jobs possible.

An industrial robot is just a machine- no different in the big scheme of things than any other machine that's streamlined and made things easier. Versions of them were first put to use in the 1960's and they've been with us ever since.

You (and others) just lose your mind because of the term robot and the fact that they have mechanical limbs- but it's like bitching about aircraft having auto-pilot functions, or an automated printing press/modern page layout vs. making books by hand, or a machine that packs boxes or one that puts caps on bottles, or name any of countless other tasks done by machines in the modern world.

It's just funny that people really think a robot is going to take jobs that actually require human creativity, problem solving and skill any time soon. I guess some people here doing some mundane bullshit drek of a job that a monkey could do might have some cause to worry, but for most people with any kind of real job, it's actually pretty laughable at this point in time.

But by all means- back aboard the moonbeam crazy train of gloom, doom and batshit insanity.

 

[BoberFett]

You're totally unhinged. I'm pointing out the facts and some of my opinion about where things are going and you seem to be taking it personally. Nothing in my post could be construed as whining, merely observation.

Where are all these these jobs that require human creativity and problem solving? Please, list some jobs that are impervious to mechanization.

 

[bshole]

Please, list some jobs that are impervious to mechanization.

Posting to anonymous message boards?

 

[Moonbeam]

On the scale of nutjobs when it comes to this subject, you're actually in the grand company of none other than Moonbeam!

You were whining at someone as if an industrial robot having progressed in a decade like any other technology is something to get bent out of shape over.

By the way, I now remember YOU were the nutbag whining for a few thousand telephone switchboard jobs vs. the entire modern age of communication that's made infinite more jobs possible.

An industrial robot is just a machine- no different in the big scheme of things than any other machine that's streamlined and made things easier. Versions of them were first put to use in the 1960's and they've been with us ever since.

You (and others) just lose your mind because of the term robot and the fact that they have mechanical limbs- but it's like bitching about aircraft having auto-pilot functions, or an automated printing press/modern page layout vs. making books by hand, or a machine that packs boxes or one that puts caps on bottles, or name any of countless other tasks done by machines in the modern world.

It's just funny that people really think a robot is going to take jobs that actually require human creativity, problem solving and skill any time soon. I guess some people here doing some mundane bullshit drek of a job that a monkey could do might have some cause to worry, but for most people with any kind of real job, it's actually pretty laughable at this point in time.

But by all means- back aboard the moonbeam crazy train of gloom, doom and batshit insanity.

Clearly you are a special snowflake, Zaap, and as such, from your lofty perch of prideful self-made manhood, it becomes very important to you to trumpet your vast superiority to others thither and yon by defending it against any potential future tarnish through the denigration of the capacity of others less self absorbed to look without trepidation at real world trends and by rational analysis predict objectively where they may lead. But do not be afraid, little one. You will always be able to find gainful employment as a clown. You have my guarantee that I will keep you safe from the big bad monsters that scream, "THE ROBOTS ARE COMING!" Over here now, you can hide in my closet.

And while thus safely cocooned would you mind if the rest of us, or some of us at least, continue as confidently and as intelligently as we can, to explore what to do about all the billions of folk not as gifted as you at finding 'real work'.

You are right, of course, there's no need to fear all the rabble will eat your lunch so stay carefree and happy, because there will be no lunches to steal.

Now if you can find some way to keep your brain from going into seizures and your hands from thumping your penis sheath when some effort is underway to explore the future of jobs in an increasingly outsourced and mechanized world it would be nice to hear your arguments presented other than as snide attacks. Even somebody as worthless as myself is capable of that.

I believe you have badly mischaracterized various individuals who have posted here in an effort to create a target for your lance. Of what value you find in tilting at windmills you turn by blowing your own hot air I can only imagine, but perhaps hot air is all that you have.

At any rate, this is not a thread about doom and gloom, the robots are coming, but an attempt to rationally address the current real world issue of declining salaries of working people, something that I believe is real and something that looks to be very much connected to our growing technological capacity to do without human labor. I don't care if I never work another day for a paycheck but I would like at least some minimum something to eat. I think then that the negativity you fear is coming from others is actually the projection of your own negativity that you hide from yourself. It is a very negative thing to impute negativity in others.

 

[moonbogg]

I am disappointed to find that this thread is about real world issues. I enjoy the more extreme side of things. But since its about real stuff, here's a real answer. Work isn't going away any time soon. We aren't living in a world with less work. We are living in a modern, western world, the USA in particular, which has less work. The rest of the world is taking our place and they have plenty of work. So there is no work issue currently. No more than there ever has been.
Work in China has been exploding and will continue for some time I'd imagine. Many eastern regions are exploding with work. Its our turn to find out what much of the world has always experienced when it comes to a bad economy.
The robot doom and gloom thing might happen, but that's not in our lifetime and probably not even in our kids lifetimes before it really gets crazy. So the answer is a boring one.

On the extreme side of things, tech evolution will hit us suddenly, like a freight train. When evolving, just as we did, first come the limbs, then come the brains. Amazing physical and specific, dedicated mental abilities of robotics are already well established and will continue. They can do specific tasks with amazing speed and accuracy currently. That will increase much more. Then suddenly, they will gain integrated cognitive abilities and the flood gates won't just open, they will take off at break neck speed, like putting a race car in neutral, flooring it and just waiting for something to bump it in gear.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

You're totally unhinged. I'm pointing out the facts and some of my opinion about where things are going and you seem to be taking it personally. Nothing in my post could be construed as whining, merely observation.

Where are all these these jobs that require human creativity and problem solving? Please, list some jobs that are impervious to mechanization.

Obviously you've never disassembled, cleaned, inspected, determined the repairs required, or performed the repairs on a piece of machinery. Or troubleshoot issues within automation machinery/computers. Or programmed automation computers, I've never seen one that didn't require adjustments to make the equipment operate properly whether it be incorrectly programmed or needed to be adjusted to conditions within a process. You can even have programmers that are stumped because they don't fully understand the process and need someone who does know how certain parts of the process will react to the operation of the machine.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I am disappointed to find that this thread is about real world issues. I enjoy the more extreme side of things. But since its about real stuff, here's a real answer. Work isn't going away any time soon. We aren't living in a world with less work. We are living in a modern, western world, the USA in particular, which has less work. The rest of the world is taking our place and they have plenty of work. So there is no work issue currently. No more than there ever has been.

Robotics are taking away jobs. There is no doubt about that. And it is mostly taking away the lowest denominator jobs. The bastions of lower class wage generation is going away, mostly in the western world right now, but once we get it working here it will quickly spread to the rest of the industrialized world.

Right now it is cheaper to hire women and children in China than to install a robot, but how long can that last? Robots are getting cheaper because we are learning to automate the creation of robots. Soon it will be a race to see if it is cheaper to produce electricity to run a robot or food to feed a child to do the job, and solar power might make the robots win that race as well. At that point we will have reduced the entire lower class work force into literally a slave labor market.

This is not a question of if it will happen, only when. We need to be working on this problem right now. We can't afford to let it get to the point that something has to be done, because when we do that the problem is always fixed in a tidal wave of blood, and this time humanity might lose.

 

[Moonbeam]

I am disappointed to find that this thread is about real world issues. I enjoy the more extreme side of things. But since its about real stuff, here's a real answer. Work isn't going away any time soon. We aren't living in a world with less work. We are living in a modern, western world, the USA in particular, which has less work. The rest of the world is taking our place and they have plenty of work. So there is no work issue currently. No more than there ever has been.
Work in China has been exploding and will continue for some time I'd imagine. Many eastern regions are exploding with work. Its our turn to find out what much of the world has always experienced when it comes to a bad economy.
The robot doom and gloom thing might happen, but that's not in our lifetime and probably not even in our kids lifetimes before it really gets crazy. So the answer is a boring one.

On the extreme side of things, tech evolution will hit us suddenly, like a freight train. When evolving, just as we did, first come the limbs, then come the brains. Amazing physical and specific, dedicated mental abilities of robotics are already well established and will continue. They can do specific tasks with amazing speed and accuracy currently. That will increase much more. Then suddenly, they will gain integrated cognitive abilities and the flood gates won't just open, they will take off at break neck speed, like putting a race car in neutral, flooring it and just waiting for something to bump it in gear.

I don't see a dichotomy between what you call real world and extreme. You are talking, I think, about what might be referred to as the AI singularity. I am talking about how humans will deal with the slope up to it, the displacement of labor by more and more intelligent machines. All of the technological advances taking place have real world consequences and implications. Until the birth of the first artificial intelligence, if or when that occurs, we poor humans will be in charge of our own affairs. I see a problem if the profit in displacing human labor is allowed to accumulate in private hands. As our society is currently structured folk need jobs to feed themselves. I would think there is some critical mass where the effects of mass poverty will topple the system completely. I think it would be prudent to find ways to address that or to ask whether or not it's a real problem.

 

[Moonbeam]

Robotics are taking away jobs. There is no doubt about that. And it is mostly taking away the lowest denominator jobs. The bastions of lower class wage generation is going away, mostly in the western world right now, but once we get it working here it will quickly spread to the rest of the industrialized world.

Right now it is cheaper to hire women and children in China than to install a robot, but how long can that last? Robots are getting cheaper because we are learning to automate the creation of robots. Soon it will be a race to see if it is cheaper to produce electricity to run a robot or food to feed a child to do the job, and solar power might make the robots win that race as well. At that point we will have reduced the entire lower class work force into literally a slave labor market.

This is not a question of if it will happen, only when. We need to be working on this problem right now. We can't afford to let it get to the point that something has to be done, because when we do that the problem is always fixed in a tidal wave of blood, and this time humanity might lose.

This is what I see too.

When you have driven off a cliff and see the ground coming, your predictions as to what the results will be, I don't think, are the result of a negative attitude.

What I also think I see is that robotic production can take place for personal profit of for the benefit of humanity. I think some paradigm shift is needed from one to the other. I believe that is possible and I think I'm an optimist because I do. But there needs to be a path from here to there, a vision that appeals and makes sense.

 

[moonbogg]

Obviously you've never disassembled, cleaned, inspected, determined the repairs required, or performed the repairs on a piece of machinery. Or troubleshoot issues within automation machinery/computers. Or programmed automation computers, I've never seen one that didn't require adjustments to make the equipment operate properly whether it be incorrectly programmed or needed to be adjusted to conditions within a process. You can even have programmers that are stumped because they don't fully understand the process and need someone who does know how certain parts of the process will react to the operation of the machine.

And this is the part of the argument that puzzles me. I've heard people say stuff like, "Robots can't do that because you can't make a software program sophisticated enough". They are right, but no one ever said our successors will be programmed. Why wouldn't they have real brains capable of learning, just like us, but with massive advantages? A synthetic, highly elastic, fully integrated brain with a few simple operational parameters will learn and establish its own complexity just like our brains do. Fixing machines will be easy as hell for something like this.
A mechanic takes 3 hours to diagnose a complex issue, while the "robot" has blue prints in its fucking head and finds a solution as soon as it sees the damaged parts.

Robotics are taking away jobs. There is no doubt about that. And it is mostly taking away the lowest denominator jobs. The bastions of lower class wage generation is going away, mostly in the western world right now, but once we get it working here it will quickly spread to the rest of the industrialized world.

Right now it is cheaper to hire women and children in China than to install a robot, but how long can that last? Robots are getting cheaper because we are learning to automate the creation of robots. Soon it will be a race to see if it is cheaper to produce electricity to run a robot or food to feed a child to do the job, and solar power might make the robots win that race as well. At that point we will have reduced the entire lower class work force into literally a slave labor market.

This is not a question of if it will happen, only when. We need to be working on this problem right now. We can't afford to let it get to the point that something has to be done, because when we do that the problem is always fixed in a tidal wave of blood, and this time humanity might lose.

Working on what problem? I don't get it. Let me explain. For years now, I have participated in conversations with online atheists and agnostics who have boasted about their knowledge and blind acceptance of the process of evolution. These are people, like myself, who follow the evidence where ever it leads, despite our own desires and wishes. That natural process that we have trumpeted so proudly is the same process that is going to give us the ultimate attitude adjustment.
You are right to say there is no stopping this. The replacement of a dominant species never goes down quietly or gently, and to see this as anything else is wishful thinking. Follow that evidence brother, the writing is on the wall. Humanity is a blip on the radar. People always wondered if we would go extinct and how it would happen, well here's your sign. One painful step at a time.

 

[SMOGZINN]

You are right to say there is no stopping this. The replacement of a dominant species never goes down quietly or gently, and to see this as anything else is wishful thinking. Follow that evidence brother, the writing is on the wall. Humanity is a blip on the radar. People always wondered if we would go extinct and how it would happen, well here's your sign. One painful step at a time.

Are you assuming AI? Because I am not. I'm talking about nothing more than slightly more advanced industrial robots like we have working in our factories now.

I personally think we are an immensely long way from AI. I doubt we will invent a true AI in the next few hundred years. We are much more likely to destroyed ourselves fighting over wealth redistribution then inventing an AI.

 

[moonbogg]

I don't see a dichotomy between what you call real world and extreme. You are talking, I think, about what might be referred to as the AI singularity. I am talking about how humans will deal with the slope up to it, the displacement of labor by more and more intelligent machines. All of the technological advances taking place have real world consequences and implications. Until the birth of the first artificial intelligence, if or when that occurs, we poor humans will be in charge of our own affairs. I see a problem if the profit in displacing human labor is allowed to accumulate in private hands. As our society is currently structured folk need jobs to feed themselves. I would think there is some critical mass where the effects of mass poverty will topple the system completely. I think it would be prudent to find ways to address that or to ask whether or not it's a real problem.

I agree with everything you just said. Regarding machines being in private hands for profit, I think that trend will increase. There is something very strange about this and I'll do my best to explain it quickly below.

The evolutionary forces that drive us are powerful. They demand that we rise above others in order to succeed and survive, to do well etc. This tendency will force us to create systems that are so efficient and self reliant that at some point it will be hard to tell whether they are serving our interests, or their own.
In order to maximize profit, you need a machine that can remove as much of your own work as possible, while still serving your interests, but there is a threshold, and that threshold is cognition. Cognition is something that will make a machine more efficient and self reliant, but its a double edged sword, a sharp blade that we seem oddly destined to thrust ourselves upon.

So, making life comfortable before reaching singularity seems almost like listening to calming music while driving toward the edge of a cliff. We should be focusing more on the cliff rather than whether or not we have enough jobs.

 

[glenn1]

I don't see a dichotomy between what you call real world and extreme. You are talking, I think, about what might be referred to as the AI singularity. I am talking about how humans will deal with the slope up to it, the displacement of labor by more and more intelligent machines. All of the technological advances taking place have real world consequences and implications. Until the birth of the first artificial intelligence, if or when that occurs, we poor humans will be in charge of our own affairs. I see a problem if the profit in displacing human labor is allowed to accumulate in private hands. As our society is currently structured folk need jobs to feed themselves. I would think there is some critical mass where the effects of mass poverty will topple the system completely. I think it would be prudent to find ways to address that or to ask whether or not it's a real problem.

This is where progressive thinking fails most completely. You see someone who's unemployed and think by giving them a check you fixed most of their problems, and that fixing "inequality" would address the rest. Well, we've seen the results of that thinking for the last 40+ years and there's more pathology, crime, and dysfunction in the poor than ever. No amount of money you give the poor will "fix" them, since their biggest problems have nothing whatsoever to do with jobs, money, or inequality. There's a reason why some of the most successful people on earth, people with millions and billions of dollars sometimes continue working and other times "retire" to follow other passions like charity. If you gave the people in Ferguson the kind of money Bill Gates has, do you think they'd suddenly become better people who are active contributors to society and actively work to improve mankind?

 

[Moonbeam]

Obviously you've never disassembled, cleaned, inspected, determined the repairs required, or performed the repairs on a piece of machinery. Or troubleshoot issues within automation machinery/computers. Or programmed automation computers, I've never seen one that didn't require adjustments to make the equipment operate properly whether it be incorrectly programmed or needed to be adjusted to conditions within a process. You can even have programmers that are stumped because they don't fully understand the process and need someone who does know how certain parts of the process will react to the operation of the machine.

Are you following along? Are robots being used because they create more jobs maintaining them than they replace, and for how long before that is done by robot or artificial intelligence too. You mentioned that some who maintain robots still lack the skill to rectify their programming. What happens when that skill is too complex for a human to master. The problems have already begun but they will grow more complex tomorrow. The expertise to do anything of value will pass from humans to machines because it will exceed human capacity. You have a job today but what will you do tomorrow when the fundamental knowledge required to understand any single process has growing exponentially so large as to exceed human capacity to master in any timely way or ever?

 

[glenn1]

Are you following along? Are robots being used because they create more jobs maintaining them than they replace, and for how long before that is done by robot or artificial intelligence too. You mentioned that some who maintain robots still lack the skill to rectify their programming. What happens when that skill is too complex for a human to master. The problems have already begun but they will grow more complex tomorrow. The expertise to do anything of value will pass from humans to machines because it will exceed human capacity. You have a job today but what will you do tomorrow when the fundamental knowledge required to understand any single process has growing exponentially so large as to exceed human capacity to master in any timely way or ever?

Machines will never be able to do uniquely human functions functions like setting business direction, identifying new market opportunities, how to address consumer and regulatory demands and complaints, and tons more. Robots quite frankly cannot replace the "creative class" because that can't be programmed - at best you could develop some sort of Monte Carlo programming which still requires a human to analyze and create value from.