(05-09-2019 12:45 AM)Sumanguru Wrote:  I respect you for bowing out. This is one of the intellectually stronger threads on the forum, and I hate that it gets hijacked by people who just come in to talk shit about Yang and his supporters. I voted for Trump and feel betrayed everyday, but I don't go into that thread and talk shit, I wish the trolls would stay the fuck outta this one if they can't offer productive conversation.

Well apparently I did offer productive conversation if someone repped me for it. I'm sorry if what I said triggered you. If it makes you feel any better, I was probably more triggered by Yang race baiting for his big national television debut.

Ahhh well, you're right, this is one of the intellectually stronger threads on the forum and I'm to much of a damn fucktard to see that Puerto Rico isn't a state because they don't have blue eyes and blonde hair like the Swedish people too. Stupid Fucking Me.

Don't worry Sumanguru, my dumbass will bow out for now, put my head down and go tidy up and clean my room while the intellectuals discuss.

(05-09-2019 12:45 AM)Sumanguru Wrote:  The response I've been getting from people is essentially what you said. "Well, his platform would benefit me, but he said this one thing I disagree with." Or "Yeah, I would net gain from him being in office, but he has one or two policies I disagree with." I'm seeing, from all quarters, a demand for 100% ideological purity/alignment, and it's fucking crazy to me. You'd by far net gain from this but you're gonna walk? Its cutting off your nose to spite your face. We don't do this with anything else: we all want good jobs/cars/women/sales but we're realistic and smart enough to realize waiting for the 100% perfect situation is madness. You try to find the situation, after examining all the available options, that'll benefit you the most; and after examining the platform of all the candidates, including Trump, I haven't seen anyone who'd benefit all Americans more than Yang, even if he does say something stupid occasionally (and who the fuck doesn't?). So many people--black, white, whatever--let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and we'll all end up like the 40 something girl who waited for the 10 Chad and ended up with 10 cats.

Eh, it takes time. Just because Yang's ideas are getting a positive response from weirdos who hang out on RooshV forum and post about automation doesn't mean that they don't sound crazy as fuck to a normal guy, even a politically inclined normal guy.

Remember that "What do you do for a living" is the defining element of most people's lives, and has been for almost all of history. When you tell people that that's about to change, that automation means there's nothing left for them to do, even if they superficially agree they don't really "get it".

What's really going to be the catalyst is when people start seeing self-driving cars. Automobiles and driving are such an important part of American society, hell, you're not even really considered an adult unless you're a driver. When people see "Nope, there is no more driving, that's not a thing anymore," it's going to spark a lot of mental changes. And that's when Yang's ideas are really going to break through. What you're doing now is laying the groundwork and planting the seeds, and when they take their first ride in a self-driving car, that's when they'll remember what you said.

It may not be in time for 2020, which is disappointing. But just remember that you're on the vanguard of a very, very new political movement, and political movements are slow things.

EDIT: As for Uprising, people can post what they want. I've said in the past that I think Yang harbors a bit of resentment, and also fear, of whites that stems from his experiences being bullied at school. (Got that feeling from reading his book.) I would much rather vote for someone who wasn't that way, but hey, you vote for who you've got. Most republicans are too dumb to wrap their heads around the stuff Yang's talking about, so if you feel the issues Yang discusses are important, Yang's your guy.

(05-09-2019 01:14 AM)Uprising Wrote:  Well apparently I did offer productive conversation if someone repped me for it.

I actually wasn't talking about you with that line about trolls. (Hence the very first line of my paragraph about respecting you bowing out).

(05-08-2019 11:59 AM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(05-08-2019 02:04 AM)The Black Knight Wrote:  Yang might be a little too early in 2020 for the simpletons to get it but by 2024, I bet his message on automation/AI will be far better received since the overwhelming evidence (like robotaxis' everywhere) will be impossible to ignore.

This is what I keep coming back to. 2024 if Trump wins this time, 2028 if Biden wins. Dude is young, he can wait as long as it takes.

On the plus side, it means I'll have plenty of time in 2020 'cause I won't be watching the election.

I disagree, this is his only real shot.

If he has to wait until 2024 for the results of automation to be obvious, then other more charming, party backed contenders will just co-opt his policies.

(05-09-2019 01:20 AM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  Most republicans are too dumb to wrap their heads around the stuff Yang's talking about, so if you feel the issues Yang discusses are important, Yang's your guy.

Finally got around to watching Yang's interview on the JRE. He's a likable guy, he could do decently well but I don't think he'll be able to pull followers like Bernie. It will remain to be seen if they let him into the debates/spotlight or if they'll shut him out later in the process.

The issues he discusses are important, certainly. His solutions don't make him my guy but perhaps he'll pivot once he realizes the reality of the failed UBI experiments and the reality that socialist policies only work in a completely homogenous culture and backed by natural resources effectively invested (aka not solely by government only interested in growing itself).

You can post laughing Roosh gifs all you like, but it's true.

We've discussed to death the issues surrounding automation in this thread. Which republicans are talking about this problem? I can think of one: Tucker Carlson.

But forget that. How many Republicans, actual people with power, are talking about the life-and-death problem of the right being shoved off of social media and "deplatformed"? All of Trump's supporters, the guy's the Republicans are going to need to rally to the cause in the next elections, are being silenced, and nobody's doing a thing. 2020 at this rate is going to be like an election where one side's allowed to run TV ads and another isn't. And they're completely oblivious to the problem.

(05-09-2019 08:03 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  You can post laughing Roosh gifs all you like, but it's true.

We've discussed to death the issues surrounding automation in this thread. Which republicans are talking about this problem? I can think of one: Tucker Carlson.

But forget that. How many Republicans, actual people with power, are talking about the life-and-death problem of the right being shoved off of social media and "deplatformed"? All of Trump's supporters, the guy's the Republicans are going to need to rally to the cause in the next elections, are being silenced, and nobody's doing a thing. 2020 at this rate is going to be like an election where one side's allowed to run TV ads and another isn't. And they're completely oblivious to the problem.

What you stated was "Most republicans are too dumb to wrap their heads around the stuff Yang's talking about."

The above is a completely different statement.

Had you said Republican politicians aren't talking about it, your statement would have had a completely different meaning.

Words matter. State what you mean, not some off the cuff statement painting half the country as too dumb to understand things like automation. Say that most of them don't understand it's a real threat or an imminent threat, sure. Say that they're too dumb to understand the things he's talking about? That's just nonsense and serves zero purpose other than to make you feel superior.

Add to the conversation, don't ad hominem to it.

Amazon and other globohomo corporations using complex schemes to avoid paying federal taxes altogether and further structuring their workforce to take advantage of the USA's welfare/benefit system, Andrew Yang rightly calls them out on Tucker Carlson. Here's the entire episode (this link may die but hopefully not), skip to 11:05 for Andrew's section:





By far Andrew's strongest showing on a major conservative show. I do wish our politicians would get out of the globohomo corporations' pockets. No interested in supporting his socialist policies, but this is one I can agree with.

We don't have a VAT because (I presume) we don't have a national sales tax. Counties and states apply sales taxes, which is the deal. That's why Amazon has been further miraged --- they have yet another way to dodge or put another thing on the [supposedly reporting] consumers dole.

At this stage, yes, Yang is the tallest midget. But that's how bad the Dem nominees are. I say that because he has pretty extreme ideas along with his sane ones. At least he has some sane ideas, though.

@ AneroidOcean

Is there a strong chance a lot of people unfamiliar with Yang think he is running on a republican platform? Dems dont go on Tucker that much or at all do they?

So I was getting ahead with work shit this evening and listened to the following interviews with Andrew Yang:









Some thoughts about him and his views:

-He keeps things simple backs them with facts
-He's definitely keeps things consistent
-Very logical but appeals to emotions/needs
-He does point out automation isn't just going to be just in things like trucking
-Automation is ALREADY here but not many people want to admit it
-Automation be addressed NOW rather than later
-Attempting to block automation by legislation isn't going to work and will hinder the US
-He does a great job of pointing out of people who have fallen out of the workforce OR who will be soon
-He does a great job pointing out scarcity vs abundance (we talk about that here already).
-He's hoping/relying on the average US Citizen to use the money wisely - this might be a big flaw and I don't share as much hope as he does.
-He points out how automation is going to cause ALOT of friction/desperation in the jobs that wont be around.


Overall he's very reasonable compared to the other Dem candidates - while I don't agree much on UBI because I don't think it'll be utilized as he hopes it would.

It's hard not to agree with the guy about the future of jobs in America and what's going on socially and economically here.

I can't knock guys that like him, obviously most are going to vote for Trump in 2020 and won't back an actual Dem.

(05-08-2019 08:59 AM)Sumanguru Wrote:  I wouldn't be surprised if in a generation or so many people (not all, there will always be enthusiasts) look at driving your own car as something old fashioned and dangerous because an AI is so much more accurate. It'll be like how a lot of urbanites look at living in the wild/rustic settings; maybe something that a few people dabble in (like camping) but not something you would consistently do.

I have no doubt that will happen. I also imagine that car insurance for (human) drivers will be significantly higher than those that rely on AI driving.

Curious that the Yang Gang focus on AI self-driving cars and trucks seems to have overlooked a real job killer that almost everyone can relate to...

https://www.bizjournals.com/bizwomen/new...l?page=all

BizJournals chronicles business trends and is not some looney left rag...

Self-checkouts contribute to retail jobs decline

As self-checkout gets more sophisticated, retail jobs suffer.

Retail has lost more than 140,000 jobs since January 2017 and is still declining despite strong growth in nearly every other sector and a historically-low unemployment rate, a CNBC analysis found.

Losses include 11,000 retail jobs in March 2019 alone, per the U.S. Department of Labor. Meanwhile, health care added 49,000 jobs in March and 398,000 over the past 12 months.

Experts pointed at technology like self-checkouts for the decline. For example, Kroger (NYSE: KR) this year introduced technology where customers use a handheld, wireless scanner or the Scan, Bag, Go app on their cell phones to scan the products as they go through the store. Shoppers bag the groceries as they shop and use self-checkout to pay.

Target Corp. (NYSE: TGT) is trying out a self-service, grab-and-go concept called Snack Bar at some of its locations across the country, and customers pay for their items at a self-service kiosk.

And 7-11 last year launched a pilot program where shoppers use the 7-11 app to scan items then manually pay for them at separate checkout stations. etc etc etc...

Yang actually discusses this in detail in the videos I posted above.

He hammers home the trucking becuase it's a very direct and real example.

He talks about how retail jobs, clerks, etc will be replaced and will disproportionately affect women more than men.

He also talks about how automation will affect the medical field, his example was computers replacing radiologists.

Another example is back end workers/marketers/paperwork/accounts payable/paralegal work etc being at risk of being automated.


Consumers want things faster and easier than ever - kiosks and self checkout is what we've gotten from this so far.

Lots of low skills jobs will be lost because of automation.

(05-12-2019 10:16 PM)kaotic Wrote:  I can't knock guys that like him, obviously most are going to vote for Trump in 2020 and won't back an actual Dem.

If Yang would change his 18 year amnesty deal from citizenship to lifetime permanent residency (meaning no voting rights), that would seal my vote for Yang; assuming he made it to the general and remained consistent in his beliefs.

911 made a good point a while back that the UBI combined with the 18 year delay in citizenship for illegals would essentially create culture/social "wall" among the general populace against further illegal immigration. With every citizen getting 1000/month, people are going to be a lot less sympathetic about sharing the wealth with illegals if it means their 1000 bucks gets cut to 750. In theory at least.

That said, a vote for Yang is still a vote for making white people a minority in America in the long-run. Even if UBI revitalized poor white communities and allowed other white couples the ability to afford children, I don't think in the best case it would be enough to turn the tide on the demographics. In two decades under Yang immigration reform, 10 million plus illegal immigrants would be granted the right to vote and that's would be the final nail in the coffin for white majority America forever.

I'm a bit torn about it.

On the one hand, I don't see how you realistically reverse the demographic trends at this point unless you:

1. Deport ALL illegals.
2. Strip voting rights for children born to illegals.
3. Do the Wall, merit immigration, and have real enforcement going forward.
4. End birthright citizenship.

And even then, it might not be enough.

However, it's quite clear we are not going to get any of that with Trump. At best, we'll get some tiny partial progress on the aforementioned points. The 2018 mid-terms clearly showed that Americans don't have the stomach to do what really needs to be done to reverse course. Or they don't care.

At this point, the demographic war is over in America. White people will be a minority in the future and the democrats are gonna own the entire national government.

This only leaves two other options:

1. Separation (peaceful or otherwise)

-Possible in the future but not now. Things would have to get extremely bad before enough simpletons and normies would give this serious consideration. The GOP doesn't even have the will to build a wall with a technical majority so fat chance you're gonna convince most of the GOP voter base to break-up America and endure all the struggle and introspective thinking that requires.

2. Damage Control

-Going forward, how to make life the most pleasant for MAGA types, white people who are now a racial minority overall, dissenters, non-liberals, etc. Right now, that means finding the least offensive democrat and elevating him or her.

If Yang follow through on his platform, he will:

1. Revitalize tons of communities in flyover country (many of them white).

2. Allow more working people to have kids as oppose to the welfare class being the primary baby-makers of society; which is NOT good at all.

3. Classify social media as a public utility, thereby protecting free speech and the minority opinion.

4. Reduce healthcare cost substantially

5. Make living more viable in places outside the mega-economic zones like SF, DC, and NYC.

The idealist in me wants to believe that we can get all the aforementioned and live in a post-identity politics world of relative peace.

The more pessimist side of me is saying that the "fuck whitey", "fuck MAGA people", "fuck red pill heterosexual men" bullshit is gonna go to volume 11 and it's gonna be nearly impossible to hold a dissenting political opinion without massive physical/financial risk. We are pretty much there already.

Big Tech is already erasing people from the internet obviously.

What happens when Big Tech does a search, sees you are registered Republican, and decides to force your self-driving car to take a left turn off a cliff. They will call it a "computer error" and you will never read about it because all of the "fake news" outlets and commentators have been purged from digital existence. And corrupt democrat super-majority? Good luck getting them to actually investigate.

With almost any other democrat, the aforementioned is what we're gonna get for sure eventually. With Yang, there is a slight hope that things can change course for the better with some compromise. For now, at least.

(05-13-2019 03:19 PM)kaotic Wrote:  Yang actually discusses this in detail in the videos I posted above.

He hammers home the trucking becuase it's a very direct and real example.

He talks about how retail jobs, clerks, etc will be replaced and will disproportionately affect women more than men.

He also talks about how automation will affect the medical field, his example was computers replacing radiologists.

Another example is back end workers/marketers/paperwork/accounts payable/paralegal work etc being at risk of being automated.


Consumers want things faster and easier than ever - kiosks and self checkout is what we've gotten from this so far.

Lots of low skills jobs will be lost because of automation.

kaotic, futurism is in many (not all) ways another form of endtimes theology. Most people talking about it know very little of the details and how realistic they are, yet it's scary because it seems like it is real if you look for it (think "global warming").

There are many reasons why he's wrong about trucking for at least another couple of decades and it might never happen the way they suggest.

His medical field lore is the stuff of eschatology snake oil salesmen legends (the radiology reference is a classic, most easily debunked crisis of all, nearly all AI is paltry snake oil at best right now)

These issues are way overblown and the country has much bigger fish to fry in several areas. Leave it to politicians to pretend like they know what's going on (I know several of these issues well enough to understand that he doesn't, at all --- he knows buzzwords/concepts).

Per TBK:

If Yang would change his 18 year amnesty deal from citizenship to lifetime permanent residency (meaning no voting rights), that would seal my vote for Yang; assuming he made it to the general and remained consistent in his beliefs.

911 made a good point a while back that the UBI combined with the 18 year delay in citizenship for illegals would essentially create culture/social "wall" among the general populace against further illegal immigration. With every citizen getting 1000/month, people are going to be a lot less sympathetic about sharing the wealth with illegals if it means their 1000 bucks gets cut to 750. In theory at least.

With the Democrat Marxist Socialist Communists (DMSC) radical leftists party demanding that not only 30 Million +/- Illegals (Read Ann Coulters Adios America for the research on exact numbers far in excess of the mythical 11 Million that Bill Clinton would reference 25 years ago) but also Convicted Felons and Felons still in prison being given the right to vote in the Sanctuary States right now - the idea that anyone here with any sort of amnesty or legal status not be allowed to vote for 18 years is not based upon currently dominant practice or policies - the reality is just the opposite and Yang being of a higher IQ cultural background knows this proposal has a slim to none chance of passing with the Polosi-Schumer-AOC-Beto-Bernie-Warren-Biden radical DMSC leadership.

The Robocalypse comes: Amazon offers workers $10k to quit after unveiling machines that pack 700 boxes an HOUR and could put thousands out of a job

Quote:Amazon.com Inc is rolling out machines to automate a job held by thousands of its workers: boxing up customer orders.

The company started adding technology to a handful of warehouses in recent years, which scans goods coming down a conveyor belt and envelopes them seconds later in boxes custom-built for each item, two people who worked on the project told Reuters.

Amazon has considered installing two machines at dozens more warehouses, removing at least 24 roles at each one, these people said. These facilities typically employ more than 2,000 people.

That would amount to more than 1,300 cuts across 55 U.S. fulfillment centers for standard-sized inventory.

The report comes on the same day Amazon announced it will offer help to its own employees if they quit and start a business delivering Amazon packages.

Amazon said it would cover up to $10,000 in startup costs for those who take it up on the proposition.

Amazon has made the offer available to most part-time and full-time employees, including warehouse workers.

It will allow them to lease Amazon's blue delivery vans, and they'll be paid three months' salary.

And, as Amazon offloads human workers, it's picking up more robotic help.

The previously unreported plan to use box-packing robots shows how Amazon is pushing to reduce labor and boost profits as automation of the most common warehouse task - picking up an item - is still beyond its reach.

Amazon would expect to recover the costs in under two years, at $1 million per machine plus operational expenses, they said.

The changes are not finalized because vetting technology before a major deployment can take a long time.

Amazon is famous for its drive to automate as many parts of its business as possible, whether pricing goods or transporting items in its warehouses. But the company is in a precarious position as it considers replacing jobs that have won it subsidies and public goodwill.

'We are piloting this new technology with the goal of increasing safety, speeding up delivery times and adding efficiency across our network,' an Amazon spokeswoman said in a statement.

'We expect the efficiency savings will be re-invested in new services for customers, where new jobs will continue to be created.'

Amazon last month downplayed its automation efforts to press visiting its Baltimore fulfillment center, saying a fully robotic future was far off.

Its employee base has grown to become one of the largest in the United States, as the company opened new warehouses and raised wages to attract staff in a tight labor market.

A key to its goal of a leaner workforce is attrition, one of the sources said. Rather than lay off workers, the person said, the world's largest online retailer will one day refrain from refilling packing roles.

Those have high turnover because boxing multiple orders per minute over 10 hours is taxing work. At the same time, employees that stay with the company can be trained to take up more technical roles.

The new machines, known as the CartonWrap from Italian firm CMC Srl, pack much faster than humans.

They crank out 600 to 700 boxes per hour, or four to five times the rate of a human packer, the sources said. The machines require one person to load customer orders, another to stock cardboard and glue and a technician to fix jams on occasion.

CMC declined to comment.

Though Amazon has announced it intends to speed up shipping across its Prime loyalty program, this latest round of automation is not focused on speed. 'It's truly about efficiency and savings,' one of the people said.

Including other machines known as the 'SmartPac,' which the company rolled out recently to mail items in patented envelopes, Amazon's technology suite will be able to automate a majority of its human packers.

Five rows of workers at a facility can turn into two, supplemented by two CMC machines and one SmartPac, the person said.

The company describes this as an effort to 're-purpose' workers, the person said.

It could not be learned where roles might disappear first and what incentives, if any, are tied to those specific jobs.

But the hiring deals that Amazon has with governments are often generous. For the 1,500 jobs Amazon announced last year in Alabama, for instance, the state promised the company $48.7 million over 10 years, its department of commerce said.

Amazon is not alone in testing CMC's packing technology. JD.com Inc and Shutterfly Inc have used the machines as well, the companies said, as has Walmart Inc , according to a person familiar with its pilot.

Walmart started 3.5 years ago and has since installed the machines in several U.S. locations, the person said. The company declined to comment.

Interest in boxing technology sheds light on how the e-commerce behemoths are approaching one of the major problems in the logistics industry today: finding a robotic hand that can grasp diverse items without breaking them.

Amazon employs countless workers at each fulfillment center who do variations of this same task. Some stow inventory, while others pick customer orders and still others grab those orders, placing them in the right size box and taping them up.

Many venture-backed companies and university researchers are racing to automate this work.





While advances in artificial intelligence are improving machines' accuracy, there is still no guarantee that robotic hands can prevent a marmalade jar from slipping and breaking, or switch seamlessly from picking up an eraser to grabbing a vacuum cleaner.

Amazon has tested different vendors' technology that it may one day use for picking, including from Soft Robotics, a Boston-area startup that drew inspiration from octopus tentacles to make grippers more versatile, one person familiar with Amazon's experimentation said.

Soft Robotics declined to comment on its work with Amazon but said it has handled a wide and ever-changing variety of products for multiple large retailers.

Believing that grasping technology is not ready for prime time, Amazon is automating around that problem when packing customer orders.

Humans still place items on a conveyor, but machines then build boxes around them and take care of the sealing and labeling.

This saves money not just by reducing labor but by reducing wasted packing materials as well.

These machines are not without flaws. CMC can only produce so many per year.

They need a technician on site who can fix problems as they arise, a requirement Amazon would rather do without, the two sources said. The super-hot glue closing the boxes can pile up and halt a machine.

Still other types of automation, like the robotic grocery assembly system of Ocado Group PLC, are the focus of much industry interest.

But the boxing machines are already proving helpful to Amazon. The company has installed them in busy warehouses that are driving distance from Seattle, Frankfurt, Milan, Amsterdam, Manchester and elsewhere, the people said.

The machines have the potential to automate far more than 24 jobs per facility, one of the sources said.

The company is also setting up nearly two dozen more U.S. fulfillment centers for small and non-specialty inventory, according to logistics consultancy MWPVL International, which could be ripe for the machines.

This is just a harbinger of automation to come. 'A 'lights out' warehouse is ultimately the goal,' one of the people said.

(05-13-2019 11:40 PM)Deepdiver Wrote:  Per TBK:

If Yang would change his 18 year amnesty deal from citizenship to lifetime permanent residency (meaning no voting rights), that would seal my vote for Yang; assuming he made it to the general and remained consistent in his beliefs.

911 made a good point a while back that the UBI combined with the 18 year delay in citizenship for illegals would essentially create culture/social "wall" among the general populace against further illegal immigration. With every citizen getting 1000/month, people are going to be a lot less sympathetic about sharing the wealth with illegals if it means their 1000 bucks gets cut to 750. In theory at least.

With the Democrat Marxist Socialist Communists (DMSC) radical leftists party demanding that not only 30 Million +/- Illegals (Read Ann Coulters Adios America for the research on exact numbers far in excess of the mythical 11 Million that Bill Clinton would reference 25 years ago) but also Convicted Felons and Felons still in prison being given the right to vote in the Sanctuary States right now - the idea that anyone here with any sort of amnesty or legal status not be allowed to vote for 18 years is not based upon currently dominant practice or policies - the reality is just the opposite and Yang being of a higher IQ cultural background knows this proposal has a slim to none chance of passing with the Polosi-Schumer-AOC-Beto-Bernie-Warren-Biden radical DMSC leadership.

This is a very valid point.

As I've alluded to before several times: Yang comes with the very serious risk that if elected, he would just cave to the DSMC faction (the current dominant AND growing DEM faction) and we end up with a ton of bait and switches.

However, a Yang bait and switch would probably accelerate the time-table of the other option I mentioned in my last post ("separation"); likely of the violent variety.

So, sort of a win-win in a twisted sense.

I'm warming up to this guy.

His pragmatic way of talking about taxes and companies is very appealing (instead of droning on about how awful Trump is). When he was on Tucker talking about Amazon, his phrasing was like "they aren't doing anything wrong, they're behaving as you'd expect. Be productive, make money, pay as little tax as possible" sort of speech. I liked that he doesn't see them as a bad guy as much as simply behaving like a rational organization.

It's interesting for me, a lifelong Republican (libertarian philosophy, but I vote R), that'd I'd be drawn at all to a D.

(05-13-2019 11:31 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  

(05-13-2019 03:19 PM)kaotic Wrote:  Yang actually discusses this in detail in the videos I posted above.

He hammers home the trucking becuase it's a very direct and real example.

He talks about how retail jobs, clerks, etc will be replaced and will disproportionately affect women more than men.

He also talks about how automation will affect the medical field, his example was computers replacing radiologists.

Another example is back end workers/marketers/paperwork/accounts payable/paralegal work etc being at risk of being automated.


Consumers want things faster and easier than ever - kiosks and self checkout is what we've gotten from this so far.

Lots of low skills jobs will be lost because of automation.

kaotic, futurism is in many (not all) ways another form of endtimes theology. Most people talking about it know very little of the details and how realistic they are, yet it's scary because it seems like it is real if you look for it (think "global warming").

There are many reasons why he's wrong about trucking for at least another couple of decades and it might never happen the way they suggest.

His medical field lore is the stuff of eschatology snake oil salesmen legends (the radiology reference is a classic, most easily debunked crisis of all, nearly all AI is paltry snake oil at best right now)

These issues are way overblown and the country has much bigger fish to fry in several areas. Leave it to politicians to pretend like they know what's going on (I know several of these issues well enough to understand that he doesn't, at all --- he knows buzzwords/concepts).

So break down how AI is snake oil?

How is the radiology example debunked?

I want to know both sides of the story.

Here's why I'm inclined to understand his conversation.

I work in the software/technology sector, our bread and butter is manufacturing and defense contracting.

Automation isn't end times or global warming myth - it's already here.

We help customers help get prototypes done fast, automate internal processes, ECO's, life cycles, faster time to market, etc.

Some of our customer ARE using AI when developing products and they are replacing workers on the design/mfg teams.

While yeah we still need highly skilled workers in the design processes and in software tech, I can tell you that ALOT of our customers are looking at automation, whether it's internally or for their customers.

Automation is alot more reliable, makes us money, saves them money, time and material, etc.

Walter Black just pointed to Amazon as well, which I was going to mention, we've worked with simliar companies who the same type of logistical fulfillment jobs, same goes for agriculture here in the central valley.

"Lights out warehouse" is a very well known term in the industry we're in, it's not just some buzzword either.

While it's not Yang is screaming fire in a crowded theater, but he does see smoke on the horizon.

You mention his isssues are a couple decades away, but think about this.

Any time there is technological advancement it only accelerates every singe year forward, just like it did with computers and the internet.

I agreee there's bigger fish to fry, but Yang does bring up some valid points we need to be concerned about in the future.

Obviously there's quite a bit I disagree with him on.

My theory regarding automation is not that it will lead to outright mass joblessness but it will be yet another nail in the coffin of wage depression. The jobs that will be automated are those that are the highest paid. Why? That’s top of the list for companies. Low paying jobs? Not so much. Much cheaper to pay minimum wage than buy or even rent a robot with human capabilities for doing manual labor or tech related tasks.

Kaotic is right about how automation is affecting way more jobs that one would expect. I’ll add another one: engineering. Wire diagrams and drawings can and are currently being automated. Feed a program inputs/outputs measurements etc and it spits it out.

kamoz bingo, even custom design, ETO (engineered to order) all is being automated nowadays.

I see this every single day with clients of ours who want things automated faster and efficiently.

I don't think it's going to cause massive unemployment however wage depression is a real thing.

Wages have stagnated for a long time and so has your how far your dollar goes.

At the same time I'm not sure government interventions is the solution here, I'm a big proponent of small government.

(05-13-2019 11:31 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  

(05-13-2019 03:19 PM)kaotic Wrote:  Yang actually discusses this in detail in the videos I posted above.

He hammers home the trucking becuase it's a very direct and real example.

He talks about how retail jobs, clerks, etc will be replaced and will disproportionately affect women more than men.

He also talks about how automation will affect the medical field, his example was computers replacing radiologists.

Another example is back end workers/marketers/paperwork/accounts payable/paralegal work etc being at risk of being automated.


Consumers want things faster and easier than ever - kiosks and self checkout is what we've gotten from this so far.

Lots of low skills jobs will be lost because of automation.

kaotic, futurism is in many (not all) ways another form of endtimes theology. Most people talking about it know very little of the details and how realistic they are, yet it's scary because it seems like it is real if you look for it (think "global warming").

There are many reasons why he's wrong about trucking for at least another couple of decades and it might never happen the way they suggest.

His medical field lore is the stuff of eschatology snake oil salesmen legends (the radiology reference is a classic, most easily debunked crisis of all, nearly all AI is paltry snake oil at best right now)

These issues are way overblown and the country has much bigger fish to fry in several areas. Leave it to politicians to pretend like they know what's going on (I know several of these issues well enough to understand that he doesn't, at all --- he knows buzzwords/concepts).

I'm with kaotic on this. If the radiology stuff is easily debunked, please show evidence/data. Because as far as I can see, AI is whooping the shit out of medical doctors.

Here's another case of AI > medical doctors:

Is that bullshit too? Maybe, I'm definitely open to hearing a perspective that says AI didn't just outdo elite Chinese doctors on tumor diagnosis.

I keep hearing this refrain that AI/automation is decades away, yet as an engineer I don't see the data to prove this. It really even shouldn't be that hard. There's often a fundamental limit or problem that a certain technology can't solve that stops it from gaining massive adoption.

What is that problem or fundamental issue for automation? Show me an equation, or a technical analysis. Or a plot made by an engineer. Or how the data for the radiology thing was fudged. Or something technical. Not just an opinion.

Meanwhile, in NY, Yang draws yet another 1000+ crowd 8 monhs before the primary and with no media attention.