Guppycur Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 My math says Roland had 7 hours to spare. Say Roland, you gonna add more levels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppycur Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 So heres the conundrum. The wealthy, the ones that own the corps are automating. This displaces workers. No money incoming to displaced people. If the people who buy your product have no money who are you making it for? The idea behind UBI is that as large corps automate, robots, and the business is taxxed properly. Robots are being suggested to be taxxed like workers would. The revenue then raised from both sides of the tax stream is distributed among the many. It is intended to only pay for bare necessities of living (rent/food/utilities) as a supplement to you doing more productive work. You can still work and earn income, and be taxxed appropriately on whatever scale exists in your country. More productive work is partially discussed in this nice piece: AI Software Learns to make AI Software We are at a stage of rapid tech evolution like never seen before. This is not about lazy, but about social divide and equality going forward in a automated world where 1% control more than the 99% together. There are a group of billionaires in china, I think it was about 10 or so.(id have to find the source) Their combined wealth is the same as Belgiums entire GDP. ($700bn) I can't let this go, but I'll stay away from the politics part. I just want to be clear... you're saying that there's a direct connection to automation and unemployment, right? - - - Updated - - - Uh, my "reputation" is at stake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamida Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 Uh, my "reputation" is at stake. Don't think you have any worries about that... I'm coming for you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I just want to be clear... you're saying that there's a direct connection to automation and unemployment, right? Yes, directly responsible. Below is the current projections up to 2024 for a "good chunk" of jobs that will go. Click the img to go to source. The above doesnt address trucks, below is the image for projected trucking loses. click image for article. (image is from bls like above). Again, that isnt including public transport either. Self-driving buses are now shuttling folks around downtown Las Vegas Ive already touched on delivery vans and even software for AI/science so I wont rehash. There WAS a federal report, trump has removed it. But again, its not just those. What about bankers/wall street. You bet they are done http://www.nanalyze.com/2017/02/artificial-intelligence-investment-banking/ At its height back in 2000, the U.S. cash equities trading desk at Goldman Sachs’s New York headquarters employed 600 traders, buying and selling stock on the orders of the investment bank’s large clients. Today there are just two equity traders left. What you can now do is take all those spreadsheets that your analysts spend 16-hour days filling out and then plug each field into the Alphasense API. Change the name of the company to which ever publicly traded company you want to acquire. Click refresh. No more overpaid developed markets analysts. No more “John in Mumbai”. Sure, it doesn’t work for private companies but we’re pretty sure you can link it to any accounting system out there that private companies use. JPMorgan Software Does in Seconds What Took Lawyers 360,000 Hours What about something more common, line cooks. Meet Flippy you will see Flippy across 50 caliburger stores in the next 2 years (main rollout 2018). Thats potentially 2.3 million workers in this industry unemployed, if these take off. Farm hands? Damn straight Mass unemployment is coming, faster than you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppycur Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Here is the flaw in that logic. It presumes other jobs won't take the place of the lost ones. We've been automating for a while now, and yet new jobs take the place of the old ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppycur Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Hell, you can just look at the industrial revolution here in the US... It was essentially a huge shift in what jobs were available, in the very same fashion your automation cites, yet it had a GOOD impact on employment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Hell, you can just look at the industrial revolution here in the US... It was essentially a huge shift in what jobs were available, in the very same fashion your automation cites, yet it had a GOOD impact on employment. Not exactly the same, however. There will be new jobs, sure. They will be more towards "high skilled" than the low skilled jobs that most robots will take. The question really is, will there be enough new jobs to offset. This is quite a topic in europe atm. “People who risk losing their jobs because of digitisation need and deserve our help,” he told a gathering of manufacturing industry executives yesterday (7 March) in Brussels. Ansip acknowledged that employment in the sector will buckle as a result of technological change. Companies will need to hire employees with specialised skills to operate robots and automated machines that replace lower-skilled factory jobs. “In manufacturing it is true that some jobs are disappearing but it is also true that the job skills we need for future manufacturing will be more high-tech as the economy grows,” he said. Only 3.6% of the EU workforce are technology specialists, according to data published by the Commission last week. Only 56% of Europeans have the most basic digital skills. Ansip’s comments follow months of promises from politicians in the UK and US to boost lagging manufacturing industries with tax breaks and other incentives to hire workers. Manufacturing jobs in industrial powerhouse Germany shrunk by 19% between 1996 and 2012, compared to a loss of 33% of manufacturing jobs in the US during the same period. President Trump campaigned last year on a platform of restoring lost manufacturing jobs. The UK shed even more manufacturing jobs than the US over the same 16 years. “We should not ignore the social risks involved,” Time will tell. (specifically the next 5 - 10 years) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppycur Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Europe has its own challenges, due to reasons we can't discuss here. Suffice to say, I'm right and you're wrong. ...trust me, because I'm an American. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Id dare say, your problems are far bigger right now.... I am from the future so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppycur Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 We are actually doing pretty well. Not only did the sky NOT fall, things are going well... Even cnn complimented he who shall not be named (yesterday I believe). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glimpse Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 ...trust me, because I'm an American. Worse, you're Texan. Double Negative Secret Probation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 We are actually doing pretty well. Not only did the sky NOT fall, things are going well... Even cnn complimented he who shall not be named (yesterday I believe). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 @Guppy. A new perspective from Bill Gates and a variation of UBI shared by a couple others. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/mar/13/what-is-a-robot-exactly-and-how-do-we-make-it-pay-tax?CMP=soc_567 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppycur Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Taxing robots? My initial reaction is "that's stupid". I'll have to think on that one, because it does have long term ramifications on income tax. ...Bill Gates is a "Credible source" for tax discussion? It's like listening to Sean Penn on climate change... just doesn't jive well with me. Reading the article, I share a lot of the same concerns the author does. What is a robot, being the main one. I'll say this. From Wall-E to Terminator, from Wargames to The Matrix, movies have taught us one thing... don't rely on robots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tin Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Taxing robots? My initial reaction is "that's stupid". I'll have to think on that one, because it does have long term ramifications on income tax. ...Bill Gates is a "Credible source" for tax discussion? It's like listening to Sean Penn on climate change... just doesn't jive well with me. Reading the article, I share a lot of the same concerns the author does. What is a robot, being the main one. I'll say this. From Wall-E to Terminator, from Wargames to The Matrix, movies have taught us one thing... don't rely on robots. Never know when they will have a bad day and just start spitting lube into your food just because! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitnoid Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 This, from the guy who never came up with an original idea of his own except licensing software. Priceless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 ...Trump is a "Credible source" for tax discussion? It's like listening to Scott Pruitt on climate change... just doesn't jive well with me. Fixed that for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppycur Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 I don't think anyone has a real problem acknowledging climate change, it's mans contribution that's in question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 it's mans contribution that's in question. Its not in question at all. Its a known quantity. Mr Pruitt is in complete denial. You dont get to pick and choose which science does, or does not work for you. Science doesnt work like that. Denounce science and you may as well. Not seek any medical treatment. Not use electricty. Stop using your phone, gps, baby formula etc etc. Vaccinations are also a known quantity, that dont cause autism, at all, period. Start praying to magical fairy men in the sky instead. You may not have much climate change repercussions in the US yet, but its very heavily felt in AUS and the pacific. Im out of this conversation. You and I are about to disagree very heavily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppycur Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Lol, calm down. We can't discuss it here anyway. I should have said "it's mans AMOUNT of contribution that's in question." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Lol, calm down. We can't discuss it here anyway. I should have said "it's mans AMOUNT of contribution that's in question." Oh Im not mad at all. I am extremely bothered by the proliferation of opinions over fact. No opinion outweighs scientific fact. This is exaggerated by facebook's echo chambers. Scientific facts are changing all the time due to better understanding, this is a given. It is however, far more weighty than any opinion any of us have. Again, we are about to disagree heavily. AUS's CSIRO are very well respected world wide. Many many advancements to society has come from our CSIRO. The amount of contribution is a known quantity. 2016 CSIRO report Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted March 14, 2017 Share Posted March 14, 2017 Now is not the time for opinions, but actions. 'They died of thirst': Extreme conditions wipe out forest over 1000 kilometres More than 90 per cent of Earth's coral reefs 'dead by 2050' Still willing to debate your opinion Guppy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppycur Posted March 14, 2017 Share Posted March 14, 2017 I like you. ...so no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Posted March 14, 2017 Share Posted March 14, 2017 The planet was here for hundreds of thousands of years and was thriving. Humans shows up, the planet starts dying. Coincidence? I think not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gipothegip Posted March 14, 2017 Share Posted March 14, 2017 Lol, calm down. We can't discuss it here anyway. I should have said "it's mans AMOUNT of contribution that's in question." Interestingly enough, there's evidence going both ways. It is very well possible that we are going through a natural process, but it is also likely that we're contributing and accelerating things beyond what they should be naturally. On a geological time scale, we're actually coming out of an ice age, and going into a stage of global warming, thus causing climate change. The burning of fossil fuels, especially due to mass industrialization around the globe and the fact that countries like China use very inefficient methods of processing them, is causing a lot of green house gasses to building up in the atmosphere, thus making parts of the Ozone thicker (Ozone holes are a misnomer) which affects how heat circulates in the atmosphere since the Ozone is essentially the planet's insulation. Of course, if you're not concerned or don't believe in climate change, I think we should all at least be concerned about air quality and possible resource depletion. I can vouch for air quality, I live in Utah and we have some bad air in certain parts, especially if there's an inversion. As far as resource depletion, at least the easily accessible stuff will dry up. I'm sure there's a lot, but we're also blowing through fossil fuels. It doesn't help that there are a lot of developing nations making highly inefficient use of fossil fuels. I'm not sure how much the US and other developed countries can do in regards to the rest of the world. I'm not sure what we could do about China and developing countries ♥♥♥♥ting through coal. If we want to continue the use of fossil fuels it would behoove us to use them efficiently climate change or not. That's just my 2 hundredths of a dollar. Oh, and we're discussing the reputation of fossil fuels and climate change... gotta keep it on topic, ya know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.