Even CNBC now admins that machines will replace labor

[Archbob]

http://www.cnbc.com/id/45015714

Erik Brynjolfsson, an economist and director of the M.I.T. Center for Digital Business, and Andrew P. McAfee, associate director and principal research scientist at the center, are two of the nation’s leading experts on technology and productivity. The tone of alarm in their book is a departure for the pair, whose previous research has focused mainly on the benefits of advancing technology.

Indeed, they were originally going to write a book titled, “The Digital Frontier,” about the “cornucopia of innovation that is going on,” Mr. McAfee said. Yet as the employment picture failed to brighten in the last two years, the two changed course to examine technology’s role in the jobless recovery.

The authors are not the only ones recently to point to the job fallout from technology. In the current issue of the McKinsey Quarterly, W. Brian Arthur, an external professor at the Santa Fe Institute, warns that technology is quickly taking over service jobs, following the waves of automation of farm and factory work. “This last repository of jobs is shrinking — fewer of us in the future may have white-collar business process jobs — and we have a problem,” Mr. Arthur writes.

The M.I.T. authors’ claim that automation is accelerating is not shared by some economists. Prominent among them are Robert J. Gordon of Northwestern and Tyler Cowen of George Mason University, who contend that productivity improvement owing to technological innovation rose from 1995 to 2004, but has trailed off since. Mr. Cowen emphasized that point in an e-book, “The Great Stagnation,” published this year.

Technology has always displaced some work and jobs. Over the years, many experts have warned — mistakenly — that machines were gaining the upper hand. In 1930, the economist John Maynard Keynes warned of a “new disease” that he termed “technological unemployment,” the inability of the economy to create new jobs faster than jobs were lost to automation.

Muhaha, so it comes full circle now. Machines are replacing manual labor at an ever faster pace. its most for menial assembly line and other jobs(like self-checkouts) so low-skill labor is going to be most effected. This seems to be just as much contributing to job decline as outsourcing as machines don't demand wages or join foolish unions. Of course, there will be new high-paying jobs creating and maintaining machines but not on the number of those jobs being replaced.

The new jobs will mostly all be in the engineering and technical fields but will displace thousands of factory workers. The gap between the top 10-15% of the population and the rest will grow even larger!

 

[GenMarshall]

Time to break out the Neo-Luddites. You 1%ers really want to keep the poor down .

Plus, not all trades will be replaced by machines. There will still be manual labor that will need the attention of human hands.

 

[Souron]

The new jobs will mostly all be in the engineering and technical fields but will displace thousands of factory workers. The gap between the top 10-15% of the population and the rest will grow even larger!

You speak as if having an engineering degree automatically puts you in the top 15%...

 

[Archbob]

You speak as if having an engineering degree automatically puts you in the top 15%...

It gives you a much better chance than say -- a creative writing degree. You only need about a salary of $80,000 a year to be in the top 15%.

 

[GenMarshall]

You speak as if having an engineering degree automatically puts you in the top 15%...

Well, he believes that hard sciences like Math, Science, Engineering and such are superior to everything else. Including trade jobs .

Oh the wonders of massive egos of holders of hard sciences.

 

[downtown]

Muhaha, so it comes full circle now. Machines are replacing manual labor at an ever faster pace. its most for menial assembly line and other jobs(like self-checkouts) so low-skill labor is going to be most effected.!

There were two other economists in that article who claimed that this leveled off after 2004...

 

[Archbob]

Well, he believes that hard sciences like Math, Science, Engineering and such are superior to everything else. Including trade jobs .

Oh the wonders of massive egos of holders of hard sciences.

Actually I don't have a engineering degree but statistically most of all the good-playing jobs are in these fields.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I wonder if it would be cheaper to hire people to maintenance the robots instead of making the robots maintenance themselves.

 

[GenMarshall]

Actually I don't have a engineering degree but statistically most of all the good-playing jobs are in these fields.

Though you act like it's easy to get while in reality it's not. I'm sure Downtown has chirped on this issue before.

 

[Archbob]

I wonder if it would be cheaper to hire people to maintenance the robots instead of making the robots maintenance themselves.

You need a far higher level of intellect and programming knowledge to do that. We're still pretty far away from true sentience in machines. Sure, they can play chess pretty well but I have yet to see a robot that can carry out a good random conversation.

Though you act like it's easy to get while in reality it's not

Most engineering degree(especially electrical and mechanical) have excellent employment rates(and not inflated ones like law) right out of college. If your willing to work anywhere within the United States, its really not that hard to find one if you have the skills.

You act like you have some right not to work hard and yet still have a high salary.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

You need a far higher level of intellect and programming knowledge to do that. We're still pretty far away from true sentience in machines. Sure, they can play chess pretty well but I have yet to see a robot that can carry out a good random conversation.

Also I think a lot of people for certain things would rather talk to a person than a computer. Ever seen the frustration with telephone menus? So there still be jobs.

 

[Formaldehyde]

What does that article have to do with CNBC? They merely reposted a NY Times article which is a review of a book that many other experts disagree?

 

[Tahuti]

Also I think a lot of people for certain things would rather talk to a person than a computer. Ever seen the frustration with telephone menus? So there still be jobs.

What about replicants?

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

What about replicants?

I don't know what you mean.

 

[Kozmos]

Though you act like it's easy to get while in reality it's not. I'm sure Downtown has chirped on this issue before.

Yeah, engineering is hard. But not impossibly hard. It is certainly easier than physics, chemistry or law school.

 

[Tahuti]

I don't know what you mean.

They are a bit like what you would call human clones, except they aren't produced with actual humans but with machines.

Just forgive me, I've watched Blade Runner too much.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

They are a bit like what you would call human clones, except they aren't produced with actual humans but with machines.

Just forgive me, I've watched Blade Runner too much.

Well I dont expect that would be completely workable for a while yet.

 

[GenMarshall]

Most engineering degree(especially electrical and mechanical) have excellent employment rates(and not inflated ones like law) right out of college.

Realistically, would anyone want an engineering degree? Only those who have a strong math background would be willing to peruse that degree. You can't just say ad hom "Go get an engineering degree" because realistically, not everyone can do the math.

You act like you have some right not to work hard and yet still have a high salary.

You act like there is no such thing as the pointy haired boss and the Peter Principle. They don't work hard yet have a high salary

 

[Zelig]

Yeah, engineering is hard. But not impossibly hard. It is certainly easier than physics, chemistry or law school.

You think engineering is easier than law?

 

[El_Machinae]

It gives you a much better chance than say -- a creative writing degree.

Why is the skillset acquired during a creative writing degree subject to machine innovation? It seems that creative writing is something that cannot easily be done by machines yet.

In other words, why isn't specialising in a non-automatable task beneficial? And how could it have once been employable, but now isn't? If total society is wealthier, and your job doesn't compete with machines, what makes it a bad choice?