Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday June 11 2018, @01:45PM   Printer-friendly
from the cheery-start-to-the-week dept.

Good news! Automation capable of erasing white collar jobs is coming, but not for a decade or more. And that’s also the bad news because interest in automation accelerates during economic downturns, so once tech that can take your job arrives you’ll already have lived through another period of economic turmoil that may already have cost you your job.

That lovely scenario was advanced yesterday by professor Mirko Draca of The London School of Economics, who yesterday told Huawei’s 2018 Asia-Pacific Innovation Day 2018 that the world is currently in “an era of investment and experimentation” with technology. The effects of such eras, he said, generally emerge ten to fifteen years in the future.

Innovation in the 1980s therefore sparked the PC and internet booms of the mid-to-late 1990s, and we’re still surfing [SIC - suffering?] the changes they unleashed. “Our current era of mobile tech doesn’t measure up to the radical 1990s,” he said, as shown by the fact that productivity gains appear to have stalled for a decade or more.

[...] “We predict that AI and robotics will lead to some sort of productivity surge in ten to fifteen years,” he said, adding that there is “no clear evidence” that a new wave of technologies that threaten jobs has started.

But he also said that it will once businesses see the need to control costs.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday June 11 2018, @09:27PM (14 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 11 2018, @09:27PM (#691621) Journal
    If only you guys would spend the same sort of effort making decent arguments as you do rationalizing why you should ignore disagreement!

    and if we used Bhutan's GHI

    Which let us note, is being used as an excuse [soylentnews.org] to ignore economic matters rather than illuminate them! I think the only reason Bhutan introduced such metrics is because it would have utterly failed with any attempt at real economic metrics. A nebulous measure of "happiness" is a lot easier to game.

    As to the "$10" thing, even minimum wage jobs quickly rack up more than $10. An 8 hour day at the current minimum wage of $7.25 per hour means you get back around $50. That's a quick way to solve the $10 problem for people who can work. I grant that not everyone can work, but I don't grant that it is a large portion of the US population.

    Khallow is a fucking moron for pretending

    And we all know this, but he is also a predictable source of a certain perspective.

    Sounds like an awful lot of projection there.

  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday June 11 2018, @10:45PM (13 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday June 11 2018, @10:45PM (#691649)

    Bhutan introduced such metrics is because it would have utterly failed with any attempt at real economic metrics. A nebulous measure of "happiness" is a lot easier to game.

    A) What's their motivation to "game" a respectable, by your standards, GDP?

    B) Maybe GHI reflects the actual values of the people of Bhutan and they want to shape their policies and international relationships to maximize that, instead of, for instance, trading a valley with an ancient temple for a lake and a hydro-electric dam because it represents "progress" in the opinion a bunch of foreigners'?

    C) I'm sure Bhutan is just as corrupt and imperfect as the rest of the world when it comes to government getting the people what they really want, but they've stuck by this GHI thing for quite a while now, I'm guessing it does make more sense to a lot of their people than GDP.

    even minimum wage jobs quickly rack up more than $10

    There's that assumption that "anybody can get a job whenever and wherever they want" again. Back when minimum wage was $3.25 per hour, I could interview at a dozen places advertising "HELP WANTED" and get turned away from all of them, why would it be any better today for similarly "undesirable" people?

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday June 11 2018, @11:10PM (12 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 11 2018, @11:10PM (#691657) Journal

      What's their motivation to "game" a respectable, by your standards, GDP?

      GDP measures economic activity, which I have already stated [soylentnews.org] isn't the ultimate goal of an economy. That too can be gamed (with the gaming being a significant contributor to boom/bust cycles). My view is that an economy is best measured by how it serves the needs of its participants from the lowest up to the most wealthy. These metrics don't measure that.

      Maybe GHI reflects the actual values of the people of Bhutan

      It doesn't, but "maybe" it does. The current measure serves more to excuse poor performance that to help anyone.

      I'm sure Bhutan is just as corrupt and imperfect as the rest of the world when it comes to government getting the people what they really want, but they've stuck by this GHI thing for quite a while now, I'm guessing it does make more sense to a lot of their people than GDP.

      Welcome to good propaganda.

      There's that assumption that "anybody can get a job whenever and wherever they want" again.

      Yes, and...

      Back when minimum wage was $3.25 per hour, I could interview at a dozen places advertising "HELP WANTED" and get turned away from all of them, why would it be any better today for similarly "undesirable" people?

      And you could interview at one place and get hired. Not seeing the point of your story since people were getting hired back then.

      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday June 12 2018, @12:55AM (11 children)

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday June 12 2018, @12:55AM (#691703)

        serves more to excuse poor performance

        Excuse to whom, exactly? What does Bhutan gain or lose with a good or poor GHI rating?

        Government makes decisions for large groups of people and metrics like GDP/GHI are one way of rolling up a complex multi-dimensional messy human problem into a linear measure of better vs worse, helping to make those decisions based on a little more than who yells the loudest at the meeting.

        Not seeing the point of your story since people were getting hired back then.

        I got hired back then, too. In my late teens, I'd be away at school, grow my hair long, come home for the summer, interview for jobs, get turned down everywhere, cut my hair and get hired at the next place I interviewed - three summers running. My long hair wasn't messy or unkept, or even particularly long - it just wasn't conformant with the culture of the town. Many other things were also not conformant with the culture of that town (a melting pot drawn primarily from New York, New Jersey, Michigan and Ohio), like unfamiliar accents or brown skin - those people never did get hired.

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]
        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday June 12 2018, @04:22AM (10 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 12 2018, @04:22AM (#691775) Journal

          Excuse to whom, exactly? What does Bhutan gain or lose with a good or poor GHI rating?

          The people in charge, of course, benefit greatly. Remember it's first and foremost is propaganda generated to make the current powers look good. With traditional metrics, the country is at best mediocre which would, of course, reflect badly on those in power. With the "GHI" or whatever it's called these days, they can tweak the metric itself to show great performance.

          Government makes decisions for large groups of people and metrics like GDP/GHI are one way of rolling up a complex multi-dimensional messy human problem into a linear measure of better vs worse, helping to make those decisions based on a little more than who yells the loudest at the meeting.

          Which is why they're such great propaganda. Who can be against "happiness"? The complex, multi-dimensional messy human problem is well a problem. The index number, particularly for an easy scam like GHI, can be whatever the powers-that-be want it to be.

          In my late teens, I'd be away at school, grow my hair long, come home for the summer, interview for jobs, get turned down everywhere, cut my hair and get hired at the next place I interviewed - three summers running.

          In other words, a problem that you fixed trivially by slightly altering your appearance. Tell me again why I should give even the slightest fuck about people who can't get jobs because they can't be bothered to make slight changes in their appearance or behavior. As to the racism you mention, indexes aren't going to do a thing to fix that.

          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday June 12 2018, @01:15PM (9 children)

            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday June 12 2018, @01:15PM (#691874)

            reflect badly on those in power.

            Reflect badly in whose eyes? Anybody who thinks GHI is bullshit already thinks poorly of those who use it, regardless of what it says.

            If it wasn't working for them, they wouldn't still be using it.

            As to the racism you mention, indexes aren't going to do a thing to fix that.

            But it does keep people from getting jobs, even the shittiest jobs in the county, and now you've got people with no other resources than handouts and crime. That's a problem that's much cheaper to fix than to live with.

            --
            🌻🌻 [google.com]
            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday June 12 2018, @02:27PM (8 children)

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 12 2018, @02:27PM (#691912) Journal

              Reflect badly in whose eyes? Anybody who thinks GHI is bullshit already thinks poorly of those who use it, regardless of what it says.

              Any citizen of Bhutan would be the natural target of that propaganda.

              If it wasn't working for them, they wouldn't still be using it.

              Did I ever write otherwise?

              But it does keep people from getting jobs, even the shittiest jobs in the county, and now you've got people with no other resources than handouts and crime. That's a problem that's much cheaper to fix than to live with.

              And what does that have to do with happiness metrics again? As soon as I get my civ up to industrial age, I'll fix your New Jersey racism thing. I don't remember why the switch got left on "racism on", but I'm sure it was a good reason.

              • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday June 12 2018, @04:14PM (7 children)

                by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday June 12 2018, @04:14PM (#691978)

                As soon as I get my civ up to industrial age, I'll fix your New Jersey racism thing. I don't remember why the switch got left on "racism on", but I'm sure it was a good reason.

                Like so many things, making it illegal drove it underground - and like a fungus it continues to thrive there.

                --
                🌻🌻 [google.com]
                • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday June 12 2018, @04:55PM (6 children)

                  by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 12 2018, @04:55PM (#691993) Journal
                  Earlier you wrote:

                  That's a problem that's much cheaper to fix than to live with.

                  Now you write:

                  Like so many things, making it illegal drove it underground - and like a fungus it continues to thrive there.

                  Doesn't sound so easy now, does it?

                  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday June 12 2018, @06:02PM (5 children)

                    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday June 12 2018, @06:02PM (#692033)

                    It is still a problem that is much cheaper to fix than to live with.

                    Simply making things illegal does not fix them, never has and never will.

                    --
                    🌻🌻 [google.com]
                    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday June 12 2018, @06:21PM (4 children)

                      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 12 2018, @06:21PM (#692040) Journal

                      It is still a problem that is much cheaper to fix than to live with.

                      Except we have yet to see this fix.

                      Simply making things illegal does not fix them, never has and never will.

                      Then why mention it?

                      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday June 12 2018, @07:45PM (3 children)

                        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday June 12 2018, @07:45PM (#692079)

                        Except we have yet to see this fix.

                        Fixed? No. Progress? Absolutely. The "non-discrimination" laws in and of themselves do very little, except "empower the powerless" to sue in court when they can prove that someone was stupid enough to say that the reason they made some protected decision against the person was because of their protected distinguishing trait (race, sex, etc.) Too bad that the courts are highly biased in favor of the wealthy.

                        Things that have made real progress at reducing racism include: busing for school integration, certain structural city planning (more prominent in the 1970s than recently) that placed high and low income neighborhoods in close proximity, and, let's be honest, the dying off of people who used to live with open racism and never interacted with people of other races until later in life.

                        As long as people are segregated along racial, or any other lines, there will be prominent differences - perpetuating the basis of the prejudices.

                        Simply making things illegal does not fix them, never has and never will.

                        Then why mention it?

                        I believe this one started with a quip along the lines of "Anybody can earn $10 with very little effort" - which: A) missed the point that working 2 hours at any kind of a job is a lot more than a wealthy person would ever consider doing for $10, and B) not everybody can get a job to earn an extra $10 over and above their essential living expenses.

                        --
                        🌻🌻 [google.com]
                        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday June 13 2018, @05:10AM (2 children)

                          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday June 13 2018, @05:10AM (#692230) Journal

                          Things that have made real progress at reducing racism include: busing for school integration, certain structural city planning (more prominent in the 1970s than recently) that placed high and low income neighborhoods in close proximity, and, let's be honest, the dying off of people who used to live with open racism and never interacted with people of other races until later in life.

                          Bottom line is that your "fix" is to just live with it and wait for the bad actors to die.

                          As long as people are segregated along racial, or any other lines, there will be prominent differences - perpetuating the basis of the prejudices.

                          Assuming they don't kill each other first. And let us note here that this has nothing to do with the thread. It's a non sequitur.

                          I believe this one started with a quip along the lines of "Anybody can earn $10 with very little effort" - which: A) missed the point that working 2 hours at any kind of a job is a lot more than a wealthy person would ever consider doing for $10, and B) not everybody can get a job to earn an extra $10 over and above their essential living expenses.

                          In other words, another non sequitur fallacy. Part of a pattern, it is.

                          • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday June 13 2018, @12:19PM (1 child)

                            by JoeMerchant (3937) on Wednesday June 13 2018, @12:19PM (#692309)

                            Bottom line is that your "fix" is to just live with it and wait for the bad actors to die.

                            No, that's your bottom line. For me it's the slowest part of the solution, but still a major part of what has been implemented so far. Integration is my preferred solution, but I'm not a political activist so I'm not out actively campaigning for change beyond making sure that my family is "out in the world" as integrated with the normies as possible (two kids with autism - not "oh dear, johnny is being self absorbed again" autism - hard core and harder core.)

                            It's a non sequitur.

                            Only when you declare it so - it was a normal evolution of a conversational tangent, if you want Roberts Rules of Order to apply, don't reply to me.

                            Part of a pattern, it is.

                            When lived as long as I have, see how focused your conversational threads are, hm?

                            --
                            🌻🌻 [google.com]
                            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 15 2018, @04:07AM

                              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 15 2018, @04:07AM (#693325) Journal

                              it was a normal evolution of a conversational tangent

                              Which is most most non sequiturs are. Normal, irrelevant tangents that distract from the subject.