When jobs and needs are obsolete

[El Barto]

This man hates America!
https://edition.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/09/07/rushkoff.jobs.obsolete/index.html

I referred to this in a thread a while back.  Now this guy's explained it, so I don't have to anymore. 

There are tons of instances where jobs are becoming obsolete, and at the same time there are plenty of instances where needs are disappearing.  As I see it, we're only just beginning this trend (just wait until 3d printing really takes off).  The question becomes how can we transition as a society.  Our model right now is for people to work so as to demonstrate worthiness to own a 96" plasma screen.  The cost of that TV will plummet, but the manufactures will create artificial value to keep it's worth up.  That's one aspect of capitalism that we've all figured out.  The problem is that along with making newer, feature rich televisions, they're also eliminating all of the jobs that people need to be able to buy them.  It seems to me that the current model is unsustainable.

The obvious solution is the Gene Roddenberry model,  where money and wants become obsolete.  Alas, that's currently incompatible with American values.  But aside from that, there will always be need for some human labor and creativity.  That really screws everything up.  How do you manage a system where only 10% of the human workforce is needed, and the other guys can still have everything they want or need?

So now what?

[soundgarden]

The key point is "Everything they WANT"

Where needs can be easily provided for; the want for things by humans and the natural tendency of humans to stratify society will always create a want greater than the want of the next. 

Can anyone here admit, given everything they currently want, wouldn't want something more?  Give me everything Earth has to offer and I would like to travel to Mars.  There is no limit to our imagination and because of that a want will always be there; always.  If not, we would have been satisfied with living in a cave millinia ago.

I think our current work opportunity vs. population is just a ripple disturbance that comes about whenever radical technologies appear.  I suspect it will stabilize eventually until the next big thing.

[rumborak]

The guy is touching on a subject I have thought about on and off. The implicit assumption is always that everybody can produce something that somebody else wants. Frankly, I don't see how that could be universally true. And since technology replaces all the menial jobs, the expectations on the workforce is constantly rising. Humans are the same as they were 1,000 years ago, and while everybody can learn how to till a field, not everybody can learn to program computers or sequence DNA.

rumborak

[El Barto]

The key point is "Everything they WANT"

Where needs can be easily provided for; the want for things by humans and the natural tendency of humans to stratify society will always create a want greater than the want of the next. 

Can anyone here admit, given everything they currently want, wouldn't want something more?  Give me everything Earth has to offer and I would like to travel to Mars.  There is no limit to our imagination and because of that a want will always be there; always.  If not, we would have been satisfied with living in a cave millinia ago.

I think our current work opportunity vs. population is just a ripple disturbance that comes about whenever radical technologies appear.  I suspect it will stabilize eventually until the next big thing.

I think it's in our nature to always want more, but those things are going to come along anyway.  I'd like to have a nicer TV and a better car.  Sooner or later I'll have them.  The TV I'd like to have right now will be bargain-bin material in another year or two.  I'll be buying the car I want pretty soon, and it will have been made between 96-01.  Thanks to planned obsolescence we all get what we want sooner or later.  What wealth does nowadays is to give people the opportunity to buy better, sooner.  If that's where the value is that causes people to want to do better, then that's fine; more power to them.  However...

The guy is touching on a subject I have thought about on and off. The implicit assumption is always that everybody can produce something that somebody else wants. Frankly, I don't see how that could be universally true. And since technology replaces all the menial jobs, the expectations on the workforce is constantly rising. Humans are the same as they were 1,000 years ago, and while everybody can learn how to till a field, not everybody can learn to program computers or sequence DNA.

rumborak

The market's going to have to adjust to a diminishing workforce.  There's really no way that I can see otherwise.  How are they going to continue to make bigger, better televisions when the middle class only makes up a tiny percentage of the country?  Those are all of the people who currently work replaceable jobs so they can spend their weekends watching NASCAR on their big-ass TVs. 

[Scheavo]

The market's going to have to adjust to a diminishing workforce. 

Well, luckily, modernized countries already have diminishing workforces, really. Might account for something.

American values are simply going to have to change. We'll probably start valuing art and personal creation more, which allows people to do busy themselves, which is part of what the concern is about. And/Or maybe this'll just drive human evolution.

[kirksnosehair]

I guess I picked the right profession, because my company can't hire people fast enough.  We're in the business of making buildings more energy efficient and reducing the amount of staff you need to run a building.

Wait 

[Orion1967]

Well after 12/21/12, the only ones that will be prepared to continue life on are these people https://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/doomsday-preppers/ anyways so it's all theorycrafting at this point anywys eh? 

I do agree Barto that the current model is unsustainable, the cost of living coninutes to skyrocket out of control (IMHO mostly fueled by the cost of transportation of goods and services, but thats a whoe 'nother discussion), jobs continue to be offshored or eliminated because of rampant trade deficits, North Americans and Eurpoeans are losing jobs left and right and the governments solutions to the problem are to continue to deficit spend and increase debt and their answer is to raise taxes to pay for it.  So the already stretched thin dollar of the precious few of us that are able to sustain some semblance of a professional paycheck are getting bombarded by higher goods and services costs, higher taxes, and no increase in discretionary income...  so yeah I worry like hell about my kids' futures and the tens of thosands of dollars in college debt I am going into for them to get degrees...

<head explodes>

[jasc15]

Isn't this what all this technology was for in the first place?

We work harder to make hard work less necessary.

I have to wonder what the next paradigm shift will be like, or how soon it will be.  I heard or read somewhere recently that "all human endeavor is ultimately transitory".  The fact that a job and a career are relatively new, and associated with the industrial revolution, bears this out.  Ironically, this is all being hammered out by intellectuals who owe their ideas and existences to urbanization, a byproduct of this new paradigm.  The rural folks who never really "caught up" are probably best situated for this change.

[El Barto]

American values are simply going to have to change. We'll probably start valuing art and personal creation more, which allows people to do busy themselves, which is part of what the concern is about. And/Or maybe this'll just drive human evolution.

Well, I agree with that.  The problem is that the values that need to be changed are currently the front lines of the culture war.  Every day, people get more and more entrenched against the freeloader culture (even though they'll all be among the freeloaders soon enough).  Hell, we can't even agree that people should be able to get medical care if they don't have a job to pay for it.  As long as half the people will fight to the death over their preferred every man for himself society, the prospect of changing to a workable paradigm doesn't look very promising.

[Scheavo]

American values are simply going to have to change. We'll probably start valuing art and personal creation more, which allows people to do busy themselves, which is part of what the concern is about. And/Or maybe this'll just drive human evolution.

Well, I agree with that.  The problem is that the values that need to be changed are currently the front lines of the culture war.  Every day, people get more and more entrenched against the freeloader culture (even though they'll all be among the freeloaders soon enough).  Hell, we can't even agree that people should be able to get medical care if they don't have a job to pay for it.  As long as half the people will fight to the death over their preferred every man for himself society, the prospect of changing to a workable paradigm doesn't look very promising.

I don't really see how this has to be contrary to every man for himself. Also, one reason people don't like the idea of paying for other people, is because they have to work for that. If everyone is just freeloading off technology, I'm not sure anyone gonna give a fuck, because they're going to be too busy freeloading off technology.

[El Barto]

Not everybody will be able to freeload of of technology, though.  The world will still need people like Mason monkeying around with polymers.  That means there will still be a need for the highly educated doer.  What's in it for him?  Cars can be built without the 400,000 strong UAW, but there will still need to be some people there designing and monitoring.  Unfortunately, I don't see much success in a completely voluntary work force.

[Scheavo]

Not everybody will be able to freeload of of technology, though.  The world will still need people like Mason monkeying around with polymers.  That means there will still be a need for the highly educated doer.  What's in it for him?  Cars can be built without the 400,000 strong UAW, but there will still need to be some people there designing and monitoring.  Unfortunately, I don't see much success in a completely voluntary work force.

But that will be disassociated from "work," and intellectual endeavors can once again become more of a thing of joy and play, than of work.

[El Barto]

Just stumbled across a tangentially related comment from Maynard James Keenan, who doesn't get it either:

I think it's a much bigger conversation. I think part of the problem with most of that is just the foundation of respect or entitlement. I think 'entitlement' is probably the better word. I think, just in general, our society has gotten to the point where just you click a button, you get what you want when you want it. So until we get to a point where we realize you don't necessarily always get what you want when you want it, we're gonna have a problem. So it stems from there. And then things like file-sharing and the Internet kind of lend themselves to that mindset. So, some day, hopefully, we'll adjust that perspective ... And until somebody has actually written a check to record their own record and see everything that goes into it, they don't really understand that if you just take it... The current state of music, I'm sure there's a lot of creative stuff going on out there, but there certainly isn't—of course, I'm being nostalgic—but it doesn't seem like there's as much, creatively, going on, 'cause most people can't afford to do it."

Seems to me that we're trying more and more to artificially create value.  We keep trying to make things more expensive than they really are to keep the system afloat.  Unlike Maynard up there, I don't think that's a viable long-term solution.  Seems like at some point we're going to have to embrace that sense of entitlement and learn to roll with it.  I honestly don't know how that would work, and I don't think Americans would ever go for it, so I don't know where that leaves us.

[Riceball]

I think everyone is underestimating the ability of people to make stuff that other people don't know they want yet.

[Riceball]

Ok, a bit more substance: this guy is a crackpot (as in the article). He doesn't seem to be able to grasp the concept that increases in the level of technology increase productivity, which frees up labour to move to better uses. Manual processing of mail, for example, is horrible inefficient when compared to a computer doing it - or better still a computer being used to bypass the manual aspects of mail. It brings down costs for the economy, which raises national income and can mean that labour can be allocated to more productive pursuits.

[El Barto]

This is actually a different situation that I was getting at in this thread, but still quite relevant.  A very in depth article about outsourcing the construction of iStuff.  Because the labor costs are such a small percentage of the overall costs, it's estimated that it'd only cost an extra $65/per to build an iPhone over here rather than in Foxconn City.  The problem is that we suck at such things.  We're no longer tailored for such projects, and the Chinese are.  It would appear that we grew beyond the industrial revolution that built places such as Detroit, just as the Asians were perfecting it.  Interesting stuff.


https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/business/apple-america-and-a-squeezed-middle-class.html?pagewanted=all

When Barack Obama joined Silicon Valley’s top luminaries for dinner in California last February, each guest was asked to come with a question for the president.But as Steven P. Jobs of Apple spoke, President Obama interrupted with an inquiry of his own: what would it take to make iPhones in the United States?

Not long ago, Apple boasted that its products were made in America. Today, few are. Almost all of the 70 million iPhones, 30 million iPads and 59 million other products Apple sold last year were manufactured overseas.

Why can’t that work come home? Mr. Obama asked.

Mr. Jobs’s reply was unambiguous. “Those jobs aren’t coming back,” he said, according to another dinner guest.

The president’s question touched upon a central conviction at Apple. It isn’t just that workers are cheaper abroad. Rather, Apple’s executives believe the vast scale of overseas factories as well as the flexibility, diligence and industrial skills of foreign workers have so outpaced their American counterparts that “Made in the U.S.A.” is no longer a viable option for most Apple products. Continued

[Scheavo]

Well, hte economics of the matter of changing. It's going to cost more to produce in China soon, due to rising labor, transportation, and other costs. At that point, I don't think it'll matter too much if China is set up for it already, the jobs will start coming back on their own. Specially if you add in extra domestic pressure to produce the stuff at home.

I've heard numerous people still state that American's are more productive, so I'm not sure how much I believe the idea that other workers are "the best." Who works better: someone working 20+ hours a day, for shit money, living a shit live, and wants to kill themselves? Or someone working 8 hours a day, for decent money, living a fairly good life, and doesn't want to kill themselves?  Factory conditions can mean you can probably force more out of someone, still, but people are who in a good mood and relaxed work better, and do better work. It's why giving employees vacation days helps productivity improve.

[Super Dude]

Don't have anything meaningful to contribute just yet, simply posting here so I get the notifications.

[PraXis]

Occupations being obsolete are just a result of new technology. At some point telegraph operators disappeared and no one cares about them anymore. It's best to never become too comfortable in whatever occupation you have, but you must continue to increase your skills, both related and unrelated to the position. You never know when your current job will be replaced by a robot.

[XJDenton]

The interesting scenario comes when the singularity hits and robots and computers start replacing everyone. What happens when humanity as an entity is obselete to the economy?

[eric42434224]

Just make sure you work in the two fields that will never be replaced by robots or technology, and will always require the human touch.  Pornography production and Pork Products.  Or, as many at DTF refer to these industries:  Boobs and Bacon.

[Super Dude]

Wasn't there an article recently describing how porn filmmakers can now invent totally digital stars?

[PraXis]

The interesting scenario comes when the singularity hits and robots and computers start replacing everyone. What happens when humanity as an entity is obselete to the economy?

It'll never happen...unless robots become doctors, electricians, plumbers, farmers, etc.

[El Barto]

Wasn't there an article recently describing how porn filmmakers can now invent totally digital stars?

Sure they can, but why bother?  Even Pixar with a hundred million dollar budget can't make people look completely natural yet, and for $1,500 you can pay some real life, hot-ass 19 year old to perform any act imaginable.  Plus there are legal entanglements.  In a bizarre twist of circumstances, I suspect The Man would much rather porn be made with real actors, who are controllable and, more importantly, identifiable.  The last thing Eric Holder wants is to start having to determine if CGI starlets look 17 or 18.

[rumborak]

The interesting scenario comes when the singularity hits and robots and computers start replacing everyone. What happens when humanity as an entity is obselete to the economy?

It'll never happen...unless robots become doctors, electricians, plumbers, farmers, etc.

Actually, doctors might be the first to face serious competition. The medical databases are getting larger and larger, to the point of where doctors are simply not able to keep up with them. Regarding the "human touch", I think a lot of  people would actually like telling an anonymous machine their embarrassing bodily problem than a human being.

rumborak

[El Barto]

The interesting scenario comes when the singularity hits and robots and computers start replacing everyone. What happens when humanity as an entity is obselete to the economy?

It'll never happen...unless robots become doctors, electricians, plumbers, farmers, etc.

Actually, doctors might be the first to face serious competition. The medical databases are getting larger and larger, to the point of where doctors are simply not able to keep up with them. Regarding the "human touch", I think a lot of  people would actually like telling an anonymous machine their embarrassing bodily problem than a human being.

rumborak

Yeah, I was thinking that earlier.  And to add to that, what separates doctors is their experience.  You're GP isn't House.  Either he's seen something before, or he's going to make educated guesses.  I'd put a computer above that most of the time.

Of course there is a downside:

Dear Patient.  Our analysis has confirmed that you have  ALS .  You have approximately  9 months to live.  For more information, consult Wikipedia.  Thank you for using Health Data Industries, LTD. 

[rumborak]

No offense, but that's a classic response of "nobody would ever use that technology, it's so impersonal!!", where clearly the public will embed those machines to the degree that makes it comfortable to them. So, if you had a result like that, you would get a message saying "please go to the office for consultation".

rumborak

[Scheavo]

No offense, but that's a classic response of "nobody would ever use that technology, it's so impersonal!!", where clearly the public will embed those machines to the degree that makes it comfortable to them. So, if you had a result like that, you would get a message saying "please go to the office for consultation".

rumborak

I would take the most well-informed doctor over any computer, any day.

I might take any computer, over any doctor I might have, though.

Humans can still notice things computer can't, and we can't seem to program them to notice what we do, cause we're not sure what we're doing. This can be important in correctly diagnosing a disease.

[Dublagent66]

I don't think anything is disappearing.  Depends on what it is.  Some things are just being replaced by something else except for things that humans can't seem to let go such as fast cars and oil for example.  How long has the combustion engine been obsolete?  50 plus years?  How many jobs still exist in that field when we could be doing things more energy efficient and cleaner?  Is the mother of invention really necessity or desire?

[El Barto]

No offense, but that's a classic response of "nobody would ever use that technology, it's so impersonal!!", where clearly the public will embed those machines to the degree that makes it comfortable to them. So, if you had a result like that, you would get a message saying "please go to the office for consultation".

rumborak

No shit.

I would take the most well-informed doctor over any computer, any day.

I might take any computer, over any doctor I might have, though.

Humans can still notice things computer can't, and we can't seem to program them to notice what we do, cause we're not sure what we're doing. This can be important in correctly diagnosing a disease.

I think we'd all take the perfect doctor over a machine.  However none of us have perfect doctors.  And while I get your point about doctors noticing things that computers don't, that's not as important as what they overlook, and that's an area the computer is far superior in.  I think I'd trust Dr. Intel over the average med school graduate.

Of course treatment is an entirely different thing.  That's an area that requires the human touch, both figuratively and often literally.

[Scheavo]

Did you skip the second sentence?

"I might take any computer, over any doctor I might have, though."

[El Barto]

No, I just replied in a way that made it look like I disagreed with you.  I think your assessment was dead on, but with some important caveats.

[XJDenton]

The interesting scenario comes when the singularity hits and robots and computers start replacing everyone. What happens when humanity as an entity is obselete to the economy?

It'll never happen...unless robots become doctors, electricians, plumbers, farmers, etc.

And what would stop that from happening?

[Scheavo]

No, I just replied in a way that made it look like I disagreed with you.  I think your assessment was dead on, but with some important caveats.

Ahh. How the internet sucks.

The interesting scenario comes when the singularity hits and robots and computers start replacing everyone. What happens when humanity as an entity is obselete to the economy?

It'll never happen...unless robots become doctors, electricians, plumbers, farmers, etc.

And what would stop that from happening?

Human ability to program our own human ability. We can have robots and technology help us, for sure, but it remains to be seen if we'll crack the code on how we think, in digital form, for a robot. It may be possible, for all we know, but we can't assume that it is possible.