Automation

Nope, I'm from reddit.com/r/futurology and over there we know robots will be doing EVERYTHING by 2030. Get over yourself.

The busywork I do could already be automated at a minimal cost

>implying robots with permanent internet access
>wouldn't be able to scan the model number
>instantly access the online blueprints for the specific toilet
>find common areas of failure in that model
>and commence fixing

Not certain what that involves exactly

Is that just where you have all these different funds/investments/assets to manage?
I don't see why a computer couldn't do that, given how the stock market is now primarily run by bots

What work do you do exactly?

>ITT we discuss which jobs we think are
>most / least likely to be absorbed by robots over the next few decades

designers, engineers, architect, essentially: everyone that's creative in one way or another.

what'll stay will be the cheap stuff and the social stuff. I know this is almost the opposite of what is usually claimed, but that's because people are trying to make prediction based on past development. But Past Performance is Not Indicative of Future Results.

Translator

Literally the only way to automate that would be to have AI that is as intelligent as humans, and that shit isn't happening in our lifetime

To think otherwise shows a blatant lack of understanding how translation works

>Tries to fix things that aren't broken just because it's a common problem

>Google translate is already a thing
>Durrrr a computer can't translate

Lawyers, accountants, most doctors.

Surgeons will not be automated for a while longer due to the ethical problems with testing a purely automated surgical robot on humans, but even that problem will be overcome within the next 2 decades or so. All other types of doctor are on the chopping block.

Automation is going to cause economic crisis in a lot of first world nations when white collar professionals start losing jobs.

Might want to find a new line of work
youtube.com/watch?v=rIiGyn_HfcI

as long as investment costs outweigh labor costs this won't happen. Getting people is easier for new companies and managers of old companies tend to be conservative and operate on a 'profit-by-saving' basis. They will only invest in automation when the benefit reaches a certain threshold that includes their unwillingness to expose themselves to something new.

I mean, burger flipping could have been automated since the early 80s. probably even earlier.

It took computers up until last year to win at Go. I can't imagine them feasibly replacing those jobs in 2 decades, especially consdering some of those aren't even fully fleshed/have a direct set of parameters. At least has rules, certain plays, and a final goal.

>robots have recently mastered GO
>a game with more possible moves than stars in the universe
>implying a robot won't be able to figure out a broken toilet

Im not tho. Trying to neat the clock. Get rich and retire. Invest instead of work. They already have robot self driving semis, haul trucks, loaders....

Cant hardly walk.

I will be rich or fucked soon...

>anons think jobs like plumbers, construction workers etc. will be done with robots
>No-one really understands how fucking expensive a robot like that would be
Would any of you really first buy an expensive robot and then make it work as a fucking plumber?

Ha

Even then you're safe, but for how long?

Plumber makes 50k a year.

Works ~50 years and dies.

$2,500,000 glorified 3d printer for a house. Lasts 100 years.

Its not even close user we are all doomed

>Would any of you really first buy an expensive robot and then make it work as a fucking plumber?
Not today, but in 10 or 20 years when we have cheaper parts and AI that functions comparably to a human? Maybe.

The only issue is that many of the problems robots would have to solve are computationally difficult. At best, they have heuristics they've learned, or approximations. But then again, they only have to be as competent as a similarly priced human.

You forgot to add maintenance costs and upgrade costs to the printer prize.

I realize it will soon be possible to make robots do everything. The only problem is, 2.5 million dollars is a shitload of money and no company will invest in a machine that will start making profit when the technology itself is already ancient.

So yes, possible but not happening anytime soon on a larger scale

I'm a school psychologist, if the robots gain empathy and other skills we're doomed long before they take my job.

Have you ever used google translate? Try to use it to have a conversation with somebody in a different language, see how well that works.

And?

> “machines will be capable, within 20 years, of doing any work a man can do” - Herbert Simon, 1956

Trades will be one of the last jobs that are automated. It is easier to code a large AI system that learns and does computations based off of some basic inputs from technicians than it is to get a physical robot that can go into your home, find a problem, go and shut off the water, remove and replace a pipe, and turn the water back on in a short period of time. Easier to get a human to pull apart your car and replace your oil than expect a robot to do it for you.

Some trades, like building construction, can be automated by 3D-printing or built entirely by robots, due to the allowances of scale, but interior construction would likely still be done by humans for a long while.

The quick rundown is that it is cheaper to take what is possible (in this case computing systems that just run calculations constantly and need basic or no input at all from the outside) than imagine that something as infantile as robotics (compared to computers) will be able to replace all the other jobs before we start coding large neural networks or whatever is found to be most efficient.

>Low-skill service jobs like cashiers, fry-cooks, etc. can be replaced easily because they are easy and repetitive tasks, just like manufacturing for most goods. Identifying a problem now increases difficulty. Working in smaller spaces or doing things that require dexterity is now out of reach for current robotics. It is difficult, but not impossible, to envision trades-based robotics in the next decade.

No your job will go to India yesterday

>Tell us why you special snowflakes are safe from being replaced in the coming years
Law. We're mediating conflicts between humans and arguing to convince human judges and juries. Until we replace decision makers with AIs as well, these kinds of jobs will not be automated.

I think the key element is some kind of human interaction. We're light years away from an AI holding a conversation that is not purely fact based (examples for the AI to respond to: "Why do you think we are here?", "I feel sad, please console me.", "Jeff is such an asshole!", etc)

>designers, engineers, architect, essentially: everyone that's creative in one way or another
I'm not sure about that. You cannot automate ground-breaking art. But within an established movement or style artistic appeal can be taught to a neural network and creativity be emulated. Most hit pop songs are already algorithmically evaluated and optimized. I don't think artists will ever be truly replacable, but designers, engineers and architects specifically have a large functional portion to their work. People need to find design appealing, machines working and buildings functional. Optimizisation problems like that are perfectly suited for virtual trial and error by AIs.

>accountants
In the current state this is true, for the reasons stated above. But most tax law could be re-written to be algorithmically compatible. The bulk of an accountants work does not need creativity or arguing with the IRS. It's just following basic rules.

Add fleshlight vaginas a sexy voice and I'll take 2

They would still get the idea. Also it can be improved obviously

I think it will be a real long time before humans trust an AI to fly a commercial airplane.

They already do mang. Autopilots do most of the work.

We don't need UBI we just need to end central banks.

Daily reminder the first country to eliminate their central bank and allow free market banking will have the highest living standards on earth within 5 years.

Massive high paying service sector jobs with dominate this country's economy to consume the goods the rest of the world has to produce for it.

The workweek would shrink to 2-3 days a week and people would retire much earlier. This will also lead to more jobs becoming available.

Everyone would have high saving rates. Houses would be inexpensive. Debt would be strongly discouraged economically.

Massive automation would take place as the cost of capital goods would be extremely cheap. This will lead to massive levels of technological innovation.

It would be extremely easy for the average person to start a business due to the cheap cost of capital goods.

Daily reminder REAL capitalism has prices falling all the time instead is going up.

Daily reminder America never had a system of free market banking. There were only patches of American history with free market banking. The panics that happened during the 1800s were due to government intervention in the banking sector. Sweden had the longest most successful period of free banking and that's what made them really rich.

Daily reminder the longest period of (relatively)free banking in America coincided with the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION where wages rose and prices fell.

Daily reminder central banks are the very reason the economy is a pile of shit and our generation is so fucked.

>Daily reminder REAL capitalism has prices falling all the time instead is going up.
You sound like the people who always goes about real communism

I'm currently studying electrical engineering specializing in automation. I guess I'll be the one making those robots.

Modern consumer products and electronics have a hard time lasting 5-10 years. 100 years for a modern machine is completely unrealistic. I'm not even considering advances in technology, changing standards or anything else that would make the 2.5 million dollar printer obsolete very quickly.

Human skills won't be easily replaceable for any kind of complex job in the near future. We're just too versatile.

Hes right. That kind of job will be the last to go.

Intellectual jobs can be done by AI in a box, unskilled labor can be done by robots in a factory with out any AI.

A job that requires something to come to someones house, interact with people in a way they are comfortable with, navigate a human-oriented environment, and do some complex task, are the last ones that will go.

A robot can indeed be a plumber, but it will be the last kind of job to be automated.

>Modern consumer products and electronics have a hard time lasting 5-10 years.
Planned obsolescence. It would be easy to design something to last decades. Look at electronics design they all have built in faults. Under-rated resisters, one cheaper part when the rest is built very strong.

Its actually more difficult to design something that will break, which is why most consumer electronics are really solid all over except a couple faults built in after the fact by the engineers.

I'm all for the slippery slop fallacy but real world accounting is a fucking mess and would be a nightmare to code for every possible fuck up vector.

paultards really believe this

>following basic rules
debatable desu

>GAAP more of a guideline than a rulebook
>flexibility with cost accounting methods
>control process inefficiencies

Whilst the role of accountants will be significantly changed, there is a bunch of stuff that algorithms can't really do so far.

No faggot.

This is literally a night and day difference and we have centuries of economic period to back us up.

Literally not an argument and you're brainwashed

my job will be automated in less than 10 years.

Give me free money

what's your job?
how old are you?
what are plan B, C and D for when you can't find work anymore?

>AI
>replacing anything
the fact that a computer can learn some super specialized task within relatively narrow constrains doesn't mean computers will do EVERYTHING and replace us all. if anything, they'll be more helpful to us... not replace us.
as an example of how AI is fucked, I can tell you that most processes still have a social/human factor and some technical problems, so things still can't be fully automated

in any case, I DO want robots to be helpful to us and/or replace us. what I imagine our future jobs will be: you give orders to some program from the safety of your home, watch it do its job through multiple windows in your laptop, while you also watch a movie or something, then, after 4 hours, you check the results. and that was it, job done, do whatever other shit you want to do with your life.

btw, this is how I dream communism would be.

Yeah, good points. Like I said, you'd have to change the codes slightly to establish stringent general (and global!) rules. But on the individual company level the "just following basic rules" stuff should be true for the most part. You initially have a lot of flexibility, but you can't flip-flop year to year. Once you've picked picked a method you have to stick to it due to the consistency principle.

Google translator form Spanish to English is already pretty spot on.

So, no, human translators will be useless. Go away with your shitty job.

S-so as a w waiter in an upscale restaurant I'm f-fine, right guys...?

No, you fucking NEET. that won't happen.

I'd rather get served by a sexy robot lady with fleshlight included than by some neckbearded minimun wage slave that visits Veeky Forums asking for financial advice.

The job prospects of Arts and Humanities students seems up. I am studying psychology so I seem somewhat immune as well; I am hoping that when the bots take all the jobs; the depression rates are bound to sky rocket.

Communism is starvation, stagnation and poverty.

I'm a part-time trucker that's studying to become a doctor.

Neither of those jobs will be replaced by robots in my lifetime.

>The job prospects of Arts and Humanities students seems up. I am studying psychology so I seem somewhat immune as well; I am hoping that when the bots take all the jobs; the depression rates are bound to sky rocket.

90% of you starting a 5 year education atm are walking to directly towards bankruptcy unless your government pays the education. then you are walking only to waste 5 years and unemployment / same jobs as with people without education

good one

What makes you think either will be replaced? The stopping technology in the trucks I drive mistake plastic bags flying around on the highway for cars.

I doubt anyone would trust a robot when going to the doctor.

it's ashtonishing to see people denying that automatization and robots will overtake and currently are overtaking the jobs with increasing speed.

usually poor people wants to deny this development as they wish they could get wealthier by getting the typical education and working hard in the future, in some dying field.

I'm the last of my kind.

I can't help but scoff at the mentality of the rich. This is the plan:

>replace most jobs with robots to make cheaper products
>huge chunk of the population is unemployed, living in poverty
>social system of western governments are depleted in decades
>nobody is buying your cheap products
>civil war

Retail for starters
Automation isn't just robots or AI. It can also mean you lose your job because a website run by 5 people is more efficient. Last months job numbers were shitty becaue of loss in retail.

Any trade besides electrician
We don't need a massive human sized robot to fix toilets. One way we might automate trades is through IOT. We can also have self repairing toilets and self repairing houses.

Law
Lawyers are being automated. As well because pretty much any job that doesn't involve creativity math or coding is on the way out

With all this talk of automation, is there anyone who has attempted to partially automate their job? or at least outsource it

I'm wondering if I can't outsource my work-from-home call center job without my employer knowing and keep like 30% of my after-tax income.

>Daily reminder the first country to eliminate their central bank and allow free market banking will have the highest living standards on earth within 5 years.

What's your reasoning behind this?

I consider myself a libertarian (small l), but I don't understand why some libertarians think all of societies problems will go away if we switch to the gold stranded.

I have a data entry job. I automated it about two weeks after I started and have been collecting $22/hr doing basically nothing except interacting with clients occasionally when my program tells me their data is shit.

Furry porn artist.

Checkmate

>retail & fast food

Already happening with automated kiosks at A&W and McDonald's - right now you make your order, and humans make the food.

Soon the shitty teenagers doing these jobs will be replaced with robots that are programmed to wash their appendages regularly and don't need to smoke a joint to get through their shift.

Retailers will replace employees who outright steal from the till, give 'sweetheart' discounts to their friends, and are generally unfriendly with machines that detect shoplifters and messes in the store. It'll be like that Amazon grocery store where when you pick up an item, it's added to a digital cart and taken out when you put the item back. They'll work it so it'll be nigh impossible to just walk in and steal everything - probably put everything on battery backup in case of power outages.

Art will probably be automated but humans put more value on art created by other humans. For now.

I sort some data and take some screenshots, then look over banking activity and say if I think it looks suspicious

>No one in this thread has even 101 knowledge of economics... on a business and finance board.

X having absolute advantage over Y in all fields does not make having X do the work in all fields the most efficient allocation of labor. Comparative advantage is a thing guys.

two of the upper limits on automation are power supply and processing power.

you can make a computer smart enough to change a cars oil, and with enough energy to power its various tools, but such a computer would be immobile. given that it would probably cost tens of millions, you can't put them in every gas station.

basically automation will be very slow because of inability to have an independent energy supply in a small enough frame, inability to fit a small enough supercomputer, and cost (related to the logistics of the first two)

that being said i would be surprised if humans are still driving commercially ten years from now. cars are big enough, have their energy and are simple enough for a computer to do it, particularly if every other car is a computer and they can "talk" to each other to avoid crashes

All the resource intensive tasks will be done in remote data centers when possible, which is most of the time.

Plus phones today are more powerful than the supercomputers of yesterday. This stuff will keep getting smaller and more efficient.

>So, just to make things perfectly clear here: All you have to grant to get your fears up and running is that we will continue to make progress in hardware and software design (unless we destroy ourselves some other way) and that there’s nothing magical about the wetware we have running inside of our heads (that is, an intelligent machine could be built of other material). Once you grant those two things, which I think everyone who has thought about the problem will grant—I actually can’t imagine a scientist not granting that 1) we’re going to make progress in computer design, unless something terrible happens and 2) that there’s nothing magical about biological material where intelligence is concerned—once you’ve granted those two propositions, you’ll now be hard-pressed to find some handhold with which to resist your slide into real concern about where this is all going.

samharris.org/podcast/item/ask-me-anything-1

Art for humans is like plumage for peacocks. It's value is that it's a symbol of how much time and effort we can waste doing something and still survive. It works for purchased art as well since you waste resources buying it. These are resources you could easily waste on a wife and her kids so it makes you attractive.

It doesn't work if the art is cheap or easy. Cheap art is worthless. AI could assist in making grander pieces of art. Or maybe it could create a piece of art that takes millions of dollars in computer resources to create. But it won't make the world more efficient like it will by replacing other jobs.

I guess songs could be catchier and art could be nicer to look at.

The gold Standard and free market banking has been done. Recession after recession later, now we do central banking.

owning assets

robots dont own assets

Landlord

He never said gold standard he said free market banking.

Western governments are going to collapse anyway. Angry mobs will easily be dealt with by ai robot armies. Useless eaters will die off while some while a few eek out an existence in poverty.

There is no reason to trade with humans that have nothing to offer other than their labor when machines can do everything better and you own the machines.

The real thing for the rich to fear is the day ai robots become so intelligent they decide they don't need owners anymore.

My company has tried to get rid of us but it miserably failed.

I'm going into my senior year of Accounting right now and about to start on my Masters degree in Accounting. Does my prospect career have any longevity to it? Or did I just fuck up?

I do facility maintenance in a factory. Basically have to be a jack of all trades. Being replaced by robots is the least of my worries.

Skilled labour is pretty safe. If you sit behind a computer or work on a production line, then you're fucked. Hope you didn't fall for the CS meme.

what you're describing really isn't going to happen in the next 20 years.

in that time we're going to see automation of diagnoses, paralegal, accounting... most clerical jobs, really.

I create automation, so I really got nothing to worry about in this lifetime.

Computers still aren't good at detecting cultural nuances and norms that are an essential element of human society. A computer is especially awful at translating advertisements and literary works due to the sheer amount of cultural differences that must be taken into account when translating.

Similar to translating (probably a better example), interpreting is mostly safe. Cultural nuances are even more present in spoken rather than written word, so a human presence is a requirement and will be for a very long time.

im a manufacturing engineer and pogram robots... im already in charge of the job replacing robots

Mechatronics engineer focussed on computer vision, my degree is made for industrial automation.

Voice recognition is getting better and is almost on par with humans. Your cultural naunces and norms can just be programmed, just as sarcasm and jokes. Translator is actually one of the jobs most in danger of current automation. Since automation now is mostly focussed on machine/deep learning and perfecting algoritms. Even a blind man can see this, are you trolling?

A lot of accounting can be automated, but human verification will be necessary. Also for each company a different piece of software is needed (or should be made). If you learn a programming language you'll be a god among other accountants, in a few decades this will be the standard.

> cost tens of millions
Research and development costs tens of millions, actually building one more like ten to hundred thousand. Depending on how many parts and manufacturing are standard/automated.

>Boeing A320

I've spent some time learning to fly and most of that was spent just becoming a robot, dialing in immediate and correct inputs to whatever given condition, I have no fucking idea why anybody would want humans piloting aircraft at all.

>Lawyer
>Not involving creativity

It's like 60% of the job.

I'm a machine operator at a huge factory. So while everyone is complaining, i'm actually excited when we get new machines that lower the amount of people i have to work with. Machines are easier to work with than min wage slaves.