Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Top 10 Jobs That Might Not Survive the Coming Robot 'Jobocalpyse,' Is Yours on the List? [View all]LongTomH
(8,636 posts)14. I found a critical review of Ben Way's conclusion
Googling on 'Jobocalypse' led me to the blog: Robot Futures Book by an author with his own ideas on what a 'robot future' may look like. The author did a very critical review of Ben Way's book and the conclusions Way reached. Some excerpts below:
Ben Ways book, Jobocalypse, is subtitled The End of Human Jobs and How Robots Will Replace Them. The title summarizes the books attitude well, and while I agree that this issue is worthy of serious discussion, Ways book demonstrates common fallacies that are worth identifying. Way starts with a chart showing employment slack, and here he is inspired by McAfee and Brynjolfsson at MIT. The interesting pattern is that unemployment following recession recovers both less quickly and less fully with every more recent case of recession, and this portends business recovery practices that are becoming ever less friendly toward the individual worker. Way explains just how cautious behavior on the part of a recovering company leads toward lower-cost routes to high productivity and profits rather than making long-term commitments to fully employed new workers, even in the face of increasing consumer demand. Rightly, Way identifies increasingly inexpensive and flexible automation as an important enabler of this pattern, and I agree fully with this analysis.
However in looking at automation itself and how it improves over time, Ways argument repeats a mistaken trope so common that I believe we need to name it: Moores Leak (with due apologies to Gordon Moore). Way shows an oft-reproduced chart of computing power from 1900 through 2020. The chart shows MIPS per $1000 and shows a healthy doubling at least every 18 months, as suggested by Moores Law. Computers from various years are labeled on the graph, and the future looks bright for ever-faster computers. But the problem is the labeling: Brain power equivalent along the right lists bacteria, spiders, lizards, mice, monkeys and of course humans. And humans are shown easily achievable by 2020. Thats less than seven years from now, folks. Moores Law is a fine predictor (actually a milestone-setting device for Intel) for computing speed, but jumping over to animal equivalence forces mistaken conclusions from everyone but the computational biologists amongst us. Ways point, based on the chart, is that robots will do everything humans can by 2020, and cheaply. For this conclusion the chart lends no support. Yes, singularists will argue that just as soon as computers are fast enough, they will also be smart enough to design their own future evolutionary conclusions, and this runaway chain reaction will yield so much intelligence that super-intelligent computers can then do what we humans have not been able to do: fully emulate a human being. But that is an indirect argument that is mostly an article of faith today.
In literal terms, computer speed just does not approach humanity. Moores Leak happens when we use Moores Law to optimistically imagine a future breakthrough that doesnt really have anything to do with computing speed. Way predicts that robots will be cheap and capable thanks to Moore: Within the next generation, the humanoid robots that we see in films such as I, Robot will find their way into our homes and will be able to perform almost any task more efficiently and better than any human ever could. I disagree strongly; Way is tapping levels of actuation, hardware innovation, perception and reasoning that are more than a generation away with a statement this strong.
Read the rest here: http://robotfuturesbook.wordpress.com/2013/07/28/mini-review-jobocalypse-by-ben-way/
Note that the argument touches on the often touted: Technological Singularity, which is predicted to occur sometime within the next few decades; although, there are many people skeptical of the whole concept, myself included.
Edited to add: You might try Googling on the name: Illah Nourbakhsh, author of Robot Futures.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
65 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Top 10 Jobs That Might Not Survive the Coming Robot 'Jobocalpyse,' Is Yours on the List? [View all]
Jesus Malverde
Jan 2014
OP
You'll find a way or we'll send you off to deal with robotic corrections officers...
Jesus Malverde
Jan 2014
#4
You will command an army of robots in the new paradigm, and you will be "a" nurse... times 20.
MADem
Jan 2014
#33
I've got to get busy writing a credit card skimming program for robotic bartenders.
Ikonoklast
Jan 2014
#55
they do know that Daft Punk are not really robots but dudes in costume, right?
NightWatcher
Jan 2014
#21
So a robot with a perfect measured poor that can tell when you've exceeded limit
hughee99
Jan 2014
#12
I have an interest in robotic agriculture. The fact is, Robots can be designed that can detect a
bluestate10
Jan 2014
#37
And when the last job is eliminated and the wealthy are holed away on their islands . . .
HughBeaumont
Jan 2014
#51