• falsem@kbin.social
    81·
    2 years ago

    Yeah, now you just get a wage ceiling where you’re only employable if you’re cheaper than the robot.

  • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.mlEnglish
    38·
    2 years ago

    No, it means you won’t be able to work and will now have to fight over garbage to eat if you want to survive.

      • spirinolas@lemmy.world
        35·
        2 years ago

        The rich guy didn’t built the robot by himself. Most likely he only financed by paying the people who actually built it. He didn’t built his business by himself but paid people to built it for him even if he had the idea.

        He had an idea because he’s smart and had the education to support his intelligence. He had that education because someone paid for it, either family or the state. Even if he paid for it he had the upbringing that taught him the value of education and had the luck to be born in a country where that education is valued and pays off.

        Nothing he has was built by himself only. The only thing we do by ourselves is taking a shit.

          • kono_throwaway_da@sh.itjust.works
            7·
            2 years ago

            What’s stopping you from being rich?

            Let’s say this is right. Then you should try to explain this: Why are most people not rich?

            Did everyone just collectively decide “nah I want to be poor, be stressed and live paycheck to paycheck”? No, of course they don’t. No one does.

            Your logic is idiotic because you don’t realize the rich became rich by exploiting other people, namely the working class.

          • Buffalox@lemmy.world
            3·
            2 years ago

            Kind of makes it easier if you can get a 60 million dollar loan from daddy like Trump did.

            Or if White Daddy owns an Emerald mine in Black South Africa, taken by force by military from Europe, like was the case for Elron Musk. So how was that fair to all South Africans?

            You are completely blind if you think there is an even playing field.

            Yes there may be the occasional anecdotes, like Jeff Bezos who weren’t born rich, but for them it requires both insanely hard work and luck.

            Anecdotes are not a statistic that proves anything. And the statistics clearly say that if you are rich, chances are overwhelming that you were born into it.

            Yet the rich have a sense of entitlement that they somehow deserve to be rich, but not the people who have to work two jobs, and never have a vacation. How do you arrive at that is a fair system?

              • Buffalox@lemmy.world
                3·
                2 years ago

                Too bad. No one can do that.

                You don’t have any influence on luck. So yes, nobody can do that, that’s something you may or may not get.

                Having a better chance doesn’t mean others don’t have a chance.

                I never claimed any such thing, you are arguing a Straw Man.

      • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.mlEnglish
        12·
        2 years ago

        I never said he would give you anything for free. I said quite the opposite. Idk how you interpreted “everyone will have nothing and fight over garbage to eat” as “we’ll be given free stuff”. It seems you’re arguing a point I never made.

      • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
        8·
        2 years ago

        It starts with a basic idea like all people should have access to food, clean drinking water, shelter, healthcare, and a basic minimum quality of life. For most people, access to these things are currently granted by working and earning a wage.

        Wealth and resources are finite. As a company generates profits and it gets hoarded by a minority of people, that means there are less and less resources every single day for the rest of the population.

        As companies implement more automation, there are fewer jobs. With fewer jobs, that means there are fewer people who can afford the basic necessities of life. As companies introduce technology which can work faster than humans, it devalues a humans value to companies meaning less pay for employees, many of whom are living paycheck to paycheck as it is.

        Furthermore, with these reductions in cost to produce a product through automation and robotics we do not see a related decrease in consumer prices.

        In short, a person earns less while prices of goods continue to rise. The quality of life of the vast majority of the populace is continually going down.

        Not everyone can be a CEO, executive, or high earner. It’s just a physical impossibility. In addition, these same people weild disproportionate power in the legislature. They are able to manipulate the rules that increase the barrier of entry into a business as well as manipulate markets to prevent my goods from generating a significant profit, if they so desires.

        So while I do not feel entitled to what they produce, finding land and starting a farm would not secure those basic necessities of life and the opportunities to do so decrease daily.

    • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.mlEnglish
      10·
      2 years ago

      Real talk we’re probably all gonna get final-solution’d as soon as the rich perfect robotic automation and AI if we allow them to get that far. Because at that point we’re no longer useful to them and will be gotten rid of like an investment that’s no longer making profit.

      AI and automation are not the enemy, they’re just tools. The rich are the enemy and are using those tools to oppress us.

  • snooggums@kbin.social
    28·
    2 years ago

    The rich guy already lives in that society. How will he feel superior if everyone else does too?

  • nxfsi@lemmy.world
    24·
    2 years ago

    A robot works harder, does more, performs better and costs less than unskilled workers. A robot also does not harass coworkers or suddenly start working at another company. It would be incredibly stupid to keep hiring people who have no value to the company.

    The only risk is that these unemployed proles would suddenly decide to seize the means- oh wait guns are banned

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      27·
      2 years ago

      I work with robots in a factory.

      A robot is finicky, fails constantly, performs slower, and requires me to fucking babysit the piece of shit all night to deal with faults and errors. Theoretically the robot does the entire job of welding and bending and etching, but in practice they need me to make sure it doesn’t shit itself.

      I’m sure, at some point, they can replace me. We aren’t there yet.

      • Damage@feddit.it
        13·
        2 years ago

        Not OP, but I’m an industrial field tech, my two cents:

        “Robot” is a very wide term used for a bunch of different stuff, but mostly for industrial automation devices, which, unfortunately, at the moment are still very dumb. Industrial automation improves output, if your robot really is slower than a human, somebody messed up very badly.

        What it doesn’t improve, and instead reduces, is adaptability; humans can perceive and reason on a vastly superior scale to a machine, and they can adapt their actions to changing factors in a process much better than a machine can, and they don’t need to be programmed for every single possibility.

        It’ll take a while before machines can replace humans in non-repetitive tasks, but in those task they excel, provided they are properly designed, built and maintained.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          5·
          2 years ago

          Oh it’s “faster” but constantly fucks up and needs to retry the same job over and over, so it averages out to being slower than me just manually putting parts into a welding press. Also, constantly down and needs maintenance to come troubleshoot because it’s angry that a fixture got stuck sideways in an aperture or whatever.

          I suspect they’re not actually properly maintained, because the company decided it would be better if there weren’t manuals for the robots. They don’t want us wasting time reading!

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              2·
              2 years ago

              I’ve worked in multiple factories, this is just how robots are out here in the Midwest. Maybe you costal elites have nice robots that work, but here in the heartland they’re all shit lol

              • Damage@feddit.it
                3·
                2 years ago

                Hey thanks for considering me elite, though idk if being 100km from the sea counts as coastal… around my parts I’m as far as you can be from the sea, tbh

                • mycorrhiza they/them@lemmy.ml
                  1·
                  2 years ago

                  I took the “coastal elites” thing as tongue in cheek. Her username is “queermunist” so she’s probably not a right-winger lol.

              • Damage@feddit.it
                2·
                2 years ago

                Or they’re feeding it out of spec material… could be many things, but if robots really were so problematic, they wouldn’t be as popular as they are.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        2·
        2 years ago

        I bet it’s just running scripts though. It won’t have any actual intelligence.

        When people talk about robots taking over human jobs they’re talking really about AI powered robots. Ones capable of at least some actual thought processes rather than just blindly moving around based on what some unchanging computer code tells it to do. Ones that are capable of adapting to new situations and error handling on their own.

        Companies don’t really have those robots yet.

        Comparing current industrial construction robots to AI robots of the future is like comparing a spinning wheel to a 3D printer.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          2·
          2 years ago

          Robots are a different discussion from AI, because as soon as AI can replace human labor basically all desk jobs will vanish almost overnight. Manual labor will take longer to replace because it’s not just a matter of programming, but installing and engineering the robotics necessary to do the work.

          And even then, humans might still be cheaper since we’re just disposable meat lol

  • BilboBargains@lemmy.worldBanned
    21·
    2 years ago

    The thing is we already live in that world. Labour saving automation is all around us but we work as hard as ever. My generation witnessed the arrival of the two parent income, women entered the workplace in order to afford better housing and foreign holidays. The result? More expensive housing and latchkey kids.

    • AlDente@sh.itjust.works
      10·
      2 years ago

      Are you surprised? The more efficient machines become, the harder humans will need to work to compete.

      Edit: People are downvoting this as if it was something I wanted. It just seems like reality to me.

      • regbin_@lemmy.worldEnglish
        7·
        2 years ago

        That’s the problem with capitalism and competition in capitalism. Everyone competes to maximize cost savings and profit.

        I don’t know of a solution but this ain’t it.

  • MaxPow3r11@lemmy.world
    5·
    2 years ago

    “it means these robots will be stealing your souls (via the art you create) & also all your money (they need it more).”

  • GustavoM@lemmy.worldBannedEnglish
    4·
    2 years ago

    “What, you guys don’t have robots?”

    - Related “rich elite man” after replacing all of his human workers for robots

    In all seriousness tho – robots require energy (and lots of it) in order to work efficiently. While “any ordinary human” has to pay for his own expenses. Which means, robots will be (best case scenario) a “gimmick” for a selected few and no way a popular thing, in a way that will make all humans irrelevant for ANY kind of job.

    tl;dr: It’s okay, robots won’t take over the world.

    • Obinice@lemmy.world
      6·
      2 years ago

      Robots are already a veeeeeeery popular thing. Look at any car factory.

      There won’t be much difference between those and general purpose AI robots, except that the general purpose ones will be WAY more capable and profitable.

      Humans will always have jobs, but that doesn’t mean the trend of automation and advances replacing jobs won’t continue, and maybe accelerate too.

      • qyron@sopuli.xyz
        5·
        2 years ago

        In the early 2000’s there was a documentary on Hyundai’s fully automated factory. Required 3 full time workers, all of them maintenance. Every system had redundancies, to prevent the line from shutting down. Parts were delivered by truck (on special trailers that coupled to specific docks that automatically supplied the assembly line) or were made on site. It took 16 hours to fully assemble a car from start to finish and once the assembly line was full, a new car rolled off the line every 24 minutes.

        It was something incredible to watch, as the factory was a closed ecosystem. Cameras filmed from behind observation windows used to monitor the activity. Even if an assembly robot was to break, the line would halt, the faulty machine was rolled out automatically through a maintenance line/door and the spare would role in, in a matter of seconds.

        It was sci-fi material.

  • Zacryon@feddit.de
    2·
    2 years ago

    Or, you know, we could use robots to slowly transform our society into a robotic utopia, where people get universal basic income and can do what the fuck they want, because robots do most of the work to keep our lives running.

    But yeah, currently they are only attractive because they save costs. And that is attractive because we live in a capitalistic, profit driven society and not one where the well being of everyone is prioritized. (Although they can also help out in areas where human workforce is not available anyway, e.g., elderly care in several countires. Then again there are insufficient financial incentives to work in that area.) That’s why it’s highly probable that they will – for a long time – continue to be tools which will ease lower level work, so that humans can focus on higher level tasks. However, this level of capability is increasing over time, requiring even higher qualified humans to do very high level tasks until even those are replaced by thinking machines.

    We currently have a pyramid of work. Most jobs require low to mid level education or qualification. The higher the qualification level is, the less jobs are available (but usually very well paid though). What we are going to see is that robots wil replace one by one the lower level parts of this pyramid. And that’s bad, because unemployment rates will increase, because of that. A lot of people don’t want to or can’t improve on their education / qualification. And even if they would, I doubt that there will be a sufficient amount of jobs available. (That would be a good question for a research project though, since I don’t really know how many new jobs could be created by requiring less lower level work. I am just pessimistic right now.) ChatGPT caused a lot of concerns in text writing industries. Image generating AIs caused similar distress in the creative industry. Developments like this will continue at a high speed. At some point machines will be able to improve machines completely on themselves. Then we will have an explosion of machine intelligence.

    Society is not prepared for this.

    That’s why I am advocating that politics have to speed up creating laws and rule frameworks in which robots are allowed to be developed and operated and which also take care of those who are in danger of unemployment and financial starvation.