60,000 Foxconn Jobs on the line for robots

[derekb108]

 

 

[derekb108]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36376966

[MrRavens]

I don't know all the rules...but just eyeing it out, this post...needs some milk. xP

[trag1c]

The flip side is there will be new jobs engineering mechanical, electrical and software systems for robots as well as potential fabrication of robots depending on their complexity.

[Admiral Naismith]

12 minutes ago, CUDA_Cores said:

yes, this is progress. The jobs that the robots will be replacing will be stupid, boring and very tedious jobs that a robot should've been doing in the first place. Every time someones job is replaced by robots it is better for everyone because now our products become cheaper. Our jobs being replaced by automation is ultimately a benefit for all of humanity.

But what the f*ck is going to happen to those people. People without purpose are incredibly dangerous. F*cking world wars and revolutions have started over lesser sh*t. If we start replacing the "boring" and "tedius" jobs (i.e. the majority of jobs) with robots, what the hell are the people who now don't have jobs, money, etc. going to do? They're going to get pissed off at the f*ckers who made the robots. They're going to get pissed off at the f*ckers who bought the robots up in corporate. They'll get pissed at the few lucky mofos who got to keep their job because someone has to watch the robots. Every society right now is already a clusterf*ck of borderline extremist views all across the spectrum, the last thing needed is a larger mass of very angry people who are easily influenced.

 

This can only end badly. There is no way I can see this going well for anyone. Maybe if the cycle happened slowly over decades, that'd be fine. But if tens of millions of people are going to be out of the job in the next few years, society isn't ready for that sh*t.

 

edit- as for the people saying "but new jobs are being created for the robots!" Yes, you're right. 10,000s get laid off. 400 people now are hired into well payed jobs. Those 10,000s are going to be right pissed because they are factory workers, not engineers. They can't get one of those 400 jobs. They've been fucked over, they know it, and there is no where for them to go. In the U.S. we can barely get decent healthcare put in. How the hell will this country be able to get legislature through that a) covers the needs of a largely jobless population and b) isn't complete sh*t.

 

Have you seen a representative tell a mass of workers that "hey, ya'know, we decided to move all your jobs to (insert other nation here)". You see the type of reaction that only ends badly for everyone. Now instead of spreading it out over decades, do it all in a few years. Now, actually, take the jobs from the people in the other nation as well. Now neither group has jobs. 

[aSPIRIn4]

60,000 workers where are they going to work now?

[GauntletV2]

8 minutes ago, CUDA_Cores said:

OK, let me tell you what we do: we educate them and give them something better to do. This way these people that have lost their jobs can get an education and ultimately contribute back to society. Think about how cheap almost everything around you is these days. Our food, electronics, houses, cars and even our medical devices are all made by robots and if they were not made by robots, then everything would cost more and we would be right back to where we started in the 1700s and 1800s. Avoiding automation is ultimately a retraction in evolution in our society. I would rather have a robot putting through-hole resistors on my motherboard rather than knowing a chinese kid has to suffer through that every day when they could be getting educated, getting a job where they actually DESIGN these robots that will make our jobs easier in the long-run. Robots hurt the people who have lost their jobs only in the short term, but they will later find better, more stimulating jobs and will ultimately contribute back to society in the long-run. 

Here is the problem with that, no one is investing in education in mass enough to make sure millions within the coming decades will have the education to fill every little niche in the jobs market. You have to remember, (and im speaking as an American so theres my bias out there) the government doesn't give 2 shits about your well being. I believe it was Stanford that did a study that since 1960, 1% of legislation has come from the needs of the people, guess who got the other 99%, lobbyists. So with no education to fill jobs niches, coupled with the boom of graduates coming out of china, i believe 60-80 million, countries like the USA and those in Europe will have millions of "bums" on the street.

[Nineshadow]

16 minutes ago, CUDA_Cores said:

OK, let me tell you what we do: we educate them and give them something better to do. This way these people that have lost their jobs can get an education and ultimately contribute back to society.

Good luck with that.

[Admiral Naismith]

19 minutes ago, CUDA_Cores said:

1. we educate them and give them something better to do. This way these people that have lost their jobs can get an education and ultimately contribute back to society. 2. Think about how cheap almost everything around you is these days. Our food, electronics, houses, cars and even our medical devices are all made by robots and if they were not made by robots, then everything would cost more and we would be right back to where we started in the 1700s and 1800s. 3. Avoiding automation is ultimately a retraction in evolution in our society. I would rather have a robot putting through-hole resistors on my motherboard rather than knowing a chinese kid has to suffer through that every day when they could be getting educated, getting a job where they actually DESIGN these robots that will make our jobs easier in the long-run. 4. Robots hurt the people who have lost their jobs only in the short term, but they will later find better, more stimulating jobs and will ultimately contribute back to society in the long-run. 

1. Well golly gee I didn't think of that! Why haven't we done that already!

 

2. How is this a point? Yes, they can get a cheeseburger off the dollar menu. Whoopy-fucking-doo if only the Germans in 1933 had McDonalds! This doesn't change the fact that they're angry, so poor they can't have nice things (nice things aren't cheap), and have no real purpose.

 

3. Yep, definitely agree. . I never said "Robots taking manufacturing jobs is inherently a bad thing". I said "Society is not ready for this sh*t, and it's happening too fast."

 

4. This is the problem. There is no guarantee of that. This is not how the job market works. There's no where for these people to go. If they all "get educated" then it just means society is a little bit smarter. They're still jobless because the majority are not exceptional. Only the exceptional will have jobs. It's becoming a buyers market for employers except in a handful of sectors. The high-demand jobs are the ones that require really exceptional intelligence/work ethic, which most do not have. Or they're part of a growing field and will eventually be filled. Certainly not enough for 10s of millions of people.

 

-

Here's the thing about robots. The type of society most people are thinking of when they have a positive reaction to this news is a Star-Trek like world. Everyone can be taken care of, everyone has basic income, everyone has an equal opportunity. This can become a reality... in several decades. Right now we're stuck with representatives who think wind-power will slow down the wind and lead to global warming. Right now society is all up in arms about everything because the internet has created echo-chambers for every moronic group. Look at the U.S. elections right now. It's such a clusterf*ck. This world is not ready to deal with the mess that will be created by robots replacing humans.

 

[GauntletV2]

1 minute ago, CUDA_Cores said:

I know, and in our current economy where we do not believe helping out those in need is a pitfall of automation. But I am still going to go back to my original point and say that automation is what makes things cheaper. In the 19th century when streetlamp-lighters were replaced by the light-bulb, many thousands of people lost their jobs. But thanks to the technological innovations of the lightbulb, we were able to save everyone time because we no longer had to go out and light streetlamps by hand. Imagine if back them we simply kept those streetlamp-lighters around just so they could have a job, we would be much further behind in technology than we are now today. Robots are ultimately a benefit to society, even if it means people lose their jobs in the short term. 

Oh I agree with that completely, the issue is there is a logarithmic curve of innovation to jobs lost, at some point we will have innovated so much that we will no longer need the manpower in mass that caused a population boom, then it gets ugly

[Kobathor]

21 minutes ago, CUDA_Cores said:

OK, let me tell you what we do: we educate them and give them something better to do. This way these people that have lost their jobs can get an education and ultimately contribute back to society. Think about how cheap almost everything around you is these days. Our food, electronics, houses, cars and even our medical devices are all made by robots and if they were not made by robots, then everything would cost more and we would be right back to where we started in the 1700s and 1800s. Avoiding automation is ultimately a retraction in evolution in our society. I would rather have a robot putting through-hole resistors on my motherboard rather than knowing a chinese kid has to suffer through that every day when they could be getting educated, getting a job where they actually DESIGN these robots that will make our jobs easier in the long-run. Robots hurt the people who have lost their jobs only in the short term, but they will later find better, more stimulating jobs and will ultimately contribute back to society in the long-run. 

Yes, because there are infinite jobs to give out to 60,000 people once they're laid off. The problem with your argument is that there aren't infinite jobs to give to 60,000 people every time this happens. We don't have infinite engineering jobs, we don't have infinite computer science jobs, you can basically replace those jobs with anything and the result will still be the same: we don't have enough jobs. And we definitely don't have enough money to educate all these people every time this happens.

 

You have a very optimistic view on the world, talking about how all these people are gonna get a higher education and give back to society. Sadly, the world does not work how you think it does. It's not a perfect place.

4 minutes ago, CUDA_Cores said:

In the 19th century when streetlamp-lighters were replaced by the light-bulb, many thousands of people lost their jobs. But thanks to the technological innovations of the lightbulb, we were able to save everyone time because we no longer had to go out and light streetlamps by hand.

You have horrible examples. First the China kid, now this..

[MadyTehWolfie]

Heard the company hired children dont remember where I heard it, but if true guess the kids will need to find different work.

[Nineshadow]

6 minutes ago, Admiral Naismith said:

1. Well golly gee I didn't think of that! Why haven't we done that already!

 

2. How is this a point? Yes, they can get a cheeseburger off the dollar menu. Whoopy-fucking-doo if only the Germans in 1933 had McDonalds!

 

3. Yep, definitely agree. . I never said "Robots taking manufacturing jobs is inherently a bad thing". I said "Society is not ready for this sh*t, and it's happening too fast."

 

4. This is the problem. There is no guarantee of that. This is not how the job market works. There's no where for these people to go. If they all "get educated" then it just means society is a little bit smarter. They're still jobless because the majority are not exceptional. Only the exceptional will have jobs. It's becoming a buyers market for employers except in a handful of sectors. The high-demand jobs are the ones that require really exceptional intelligence/work ethic, which most do not have. Or they're part of a growing field and will eventually be filled. Certainly not enough for 10s of millions of people.

 

-

Here's the thing about robots. The type of society most people are thinking of when they have a positive reaction to this news is a Star-Trek like world. Everyone can be taken care of, everyone has basic income, everyone has an equal opportunity. This can become a reality... in several decades. Right now we're stuck with representatives who think wind-power will slow down the wind and lead to global warming. Right now society is all up in arms about everything because the internet has created echo-chambers for every moronic group. Look at the U.S. elections right now. It's such a clusterf*ck. This world is not ready to deal with the mess that will be created by robots replacing humans.

 

One other thing : even if they get educated, finding a work place will still be hard and probably even more unreliable than it is nowadays.

 

Anyway, in that scenario there will probably be a big increase of people working in the service area, but most probably not a big enough increase in the respective work places. (since industry will be satiated by robots)

[GauntletV2]

The only fix to this that I see is maybe a basic income that grows larger as innovations take over more and more. However at some point that will break the economy (no one is working for the money and companies are basically taking gov't iou's). So realistically, maybe an economy where 1 person in a family needs to work, and is educated for that job and payed overly well for it (however still at a savings to the company having to pay 5-6 workers for the job that1 person and 5 robots do)?

 

[Nineshadow]

6 minutes ago, CUDA_Cores said:

 

 

yep, you're right. Everything you mention is a problem, a big problem. But if you think about it is there really any other way? When innovation happens there is always going to be a winner and there is always going to be a loser and there is really no way to get around it. Not to mention society will never really be "ready" for innoviation, it's just going to happen whether we like it or not. So why try to deny the star-trek dream that everyone imagines by not giving these jobs over to robots? Because ultimately someone is going to win (everyone because of lower prices) and someone is going to lose (the people who lost their jobs) but the people who lost their jobs will only be temporary. Those people will die-out while our innovations through technology will continue forever. There is no easy way to get around this, there are always going to be losers in the battle of innovation. It's just something we all have to live with.

Uh...

Quote

Those people will die-out

What?

Hitler probably said the same thing about the Jews.

 

And here I am perpetuating Godwin's law...God damn it.

[GauntletV2]

1 minute ago, Nineshadow said:

Uh...

What?

 

Hitler probably said the same thing about the Jews.

Not necessarily, mechanics of an ecosystem come into play here, and we may have hit our carrying capacity, and exceed it. Therefor people will die out due to a lack of resources (jobs, food, housing). And maybe die out isnt the right term, over time the birthrate will be net negative until it balances out.

[handymanshandle]

34 minutes ago, Admiral Naismith said:

But what the f*ck is going to happen to those people. People without purpose are incredibly dangerous. F*cking world wars and revolutions have started over lesser sh*t. If we start replacing the "boring" and "tedius" jobs (i.e. the majority of jobs) with robots, what the hell are the people who now don't have jobs, money, etc. going to do? They're going to get pissed off at the f*ckers who made the robots. They're going to get pissed off at the f*ckers who bought the robots up in corporate. They'll get pissed at the few lucky mofos who got to keep their job because someone has to watch the robots. Every society right now is already a clusterf*ck of borderline extremist views all across the spectrum, the last thing needed is a larger mass of very angry people who are easily influenced.

 

This can only end badly. There is no way I can see this going well for anyone. Maybe if the cycle happened slowly over decades, that'd be fine. But if tens of millions of people are going to be out of the job in the next few years, society isn't ready for that sh*t.

 

edit- as for the people saying "but new jobs are being created for the robots!" Yes, you're right. 10,000s get laid off. 400 people now are hired into well payed jobs. Those 10,000s are going to be right pissed because they are factory workers, not engineers. They can't get one of those 400 jobs. They've been fucked over, they know it, and there is no where for them to go. In the U.S. we can barely get decent healthcare put in. How the hell will this country be able to get legislature through that a) covers the needs of a largely jobless population and b) isn't complete sh*t.

 

Have you seen a representative tell a mass of workers that "hey, ya'know, we decided to move all your jobs to (insert other nation here)". You see the type of reaction that only ends badly for everyone. Now instead of spreading it out over decades, do it all in a few years. Now, actually, take the jobs from the people in the other nation as well. Now neither group has jobs. 

I think that's one of the biggest issues we have to over come is that automation and our current ways of getting goods and services won't align when automation takes out a whole tonne (I prefer the UK spelling for "ton" in this case) of jobs. Which I think a future brought up in GCP Grey's video (which I'm sure you and many others know about, but if not... It's titled "Humans Need Not Apply") Though at the same time automation of jobs isn't the future it's already here it's just a when and how companies are going to start phasing out human workers to robot workers...

 

Currently our currency based systems where you work or get paid from your work to get the currency/money you can spend on goods and services which support the jobs of the people involved in making those goods or services probably won't work quite the same when large amounts of people are un-employable from automation. There are only so many engineers, programmers, etc. that are needed. The large amount of people who work in a field that is actively being automated or is about to become automated would probably create a fair bit of an issue...

Though it's possible by automation there will be new jobs that will come out of the automation of fields that employ a large amount of people.

 

I'm not sure though what the solution is to this problem...

[thekeemo]

 

[handymanshandle]

55 minutes ago, CUDA_Cores said:

yes, this is progress. The jobs that the robots will be replacing will be stupid, boring and very tedious jobs that a robot should've been doing in the first place. Every time someones job is replaced by robots it is better for everyone because now our products become cheaper. Our jobs being replaced by automation is ultimately a benefit for all of humanity.

Okay but you'll then have a lot of unemployed people, who weren't able to afford education in the first place.

I do believe that's why a lot of the people who work at foxconn factories (and other factories) work there is because it's a low skill job that doesn't require a lot of education, and the vast majority of those who work there couldn't and/or can't afford higher education.
Now automation isn't a bad thing but the way the current system of getting goods or services wouldn't be able to keep up with that.

1 minute ago, CUDA_Cores said:

I would like to get something out of the way here. Yes, when peoples jobs are replaced it is a BAD thing for the people who are unskilled enough/do not have the resources to get a new job, but only in the short term. What is going to happen to those people a hundred years down the line though? Those people are going to DIE, whether we like it or not those people will NO LONGER BE AROUND anymore. Unfortunately because nobody is immortal, whether these people keep or lose their jobs they are going to die one day. However, what is going to happen to our technological innovations? Our technological innovations are going to be around FOREVER. We are going to build on top of our innovations and make the new-generation of our children's lives even easier in the long run. Yes, innovation is bad for the current generation, but what about the new generation? Together as a society our goal is to ultimately move toward an easier, better would. Innovations huts us in the short term. but help the future-generation in the long-run. Isn't this what the human race is ultimately progressing to? A world where we never have to do any work? By doing this we must hurt the current generation but help out every single-generation of human beings in front of us. In the very long-term, these robots are going to help out everyone.

 

 

It's not only bad for the people, it's bad for the economy.

Again, I'm not against automation at least in its current form but the way we do things can't keep up.

This kind of innovation seems only good for the corporate puppet masters.

[TetraSky]

1 hour ago, CUDA_Cores said:

yes, this is progress. The jobs that the robots will be replacing will be stupid, boring and very tedious jobs that a robot should've been doing in the first place. Every time someones job is replaced by robots it is better for everyone because now our products become cheaper. Our jobs being replaced by automation is ultimately a benefit for all of humanity.

Until you lost your job to robots too...

What will those who are now unemployed do without a job? And don't say "find a new job", because the world isn't that simple anymore, especially when you consider that a single one of those 60k worker, now has 59 999 competitor most likely looking for a similar job.

[handymanshandle]

48 minutes ago, CUDA_Cores said:

I know, and in our current economy where we do not believe helping out those in need is a pitfall of automation. But I am still going to go back to my original point and say that automation is what makes things cheaper. In the 19th century when streetlamp-lighters were replaced by the light-bulb, many thousands of people lost their jobs. But thanks to the technological innovations of the lightbulb, we were able to save everyone time because we no longer had to go out and light streetlamps by hand. Imagine if back them we simply kept those streetlamp-lighters around just so they could have a job, we would be much further behind in technology than we are now today. Robots are ultimately a benefit to society, even if it means people lose their jobs in the short term. 

Education wasn't needed for them to get another job, because there were plenty of jobs one could do with out having gone through some sort of apprenticeship or something of the sort. By automating those low skill jobs and even automating higher skill/educated jobs like white collar work will cause an issue of education.

[No]

And where are those 60,000 people who need jobs going to go...

[Hydrogen1803]

57 minutes ago, thekeemo said:

 

 

This video is exactly what I thought of the second I saw this thread.