MIT professors believe fast paced advances in technology, while increases productivity, is destroyin
61 replies, posted
I don't buy it. I just think that they're a bit upset since they're not the only ones getting commissions now a days.
[QUOTE=Wizards Court;41070654]the fact most people tend to dislike math, physics and things like that doesn't exactly helps lol.[/QUOTE] in my experience people love math and physics. they don't like the way math and physics are presented. i'v seen people who are fairly adept at things like math and physics even though they don't know they are and they claim they hate the subjects.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41070906]in my experience people love math and physics. they don't like the way math and physics are presented. i'v seen people who are fairly adept at things like math and physics even though they don't know they are and they claim they hate the subjects.[/QUOTE]
Maybe, but then, I can draw, pretty well in fact, but I hate it so much that the moment I didn't have to draw anymore I promised myself I wouldn't do it again. Just because people are good at things doesn't mean they like what they are good at.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;41069290]This is precisely why Marx saw communism as a thing that would happen once most production was automated. If you have automated production which can handle everyone's needs, people really only need to work to maintain the machines, and you can afford to just hand goods out to whoever needs them. And if you don't, people are going to be very pissed that their economy has the ability to support everyone, but no one has jobs to pay for what they need.[/QUOTE]
Essentially, we have to adapt and re-evaluate the system and change the values of certain things (such as jobs) to equate for the variables of new technology.
Outsourcing jobs is a much bigger issue than using robots.
If we kept the jobs in our respective countries, then new jobs would form in different areas. Robots need a lot of upkeep and people to design them.
We knew this already in the debate section, so we beat you to this conclusion MIT!
[url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1274372[/url]
[QUOTE=Tucan Sam;41069594]Or people just need to start getting Techology and Science based careers. Seriously, those industries are booming and were least affected by the 08 economy. People just need to realize no a profession in art probably ain't going to happen for everyone, we have these things called hobbies.[/QUOTE]
You can't force people to work in a certain field, and not everyone will ever have a unified view of the world and have unified desires in which way they want to work.
[QUOTE=KILLTHIS;41068963]I wouldn't be surprised if humanity at some point fully concentrates on things where robots can't help, while robots are doing the jobs mankind used to do; primarily speaking of hard labor. Could lead to even enhanced research, more art, more entertainment, lots and lots of new ideas. But then again, who knows for sure.[/QUOTE]
This would be the dawn of a new age, we are on the cusp of that time and we will see it soon enough. With a greater emphasis on more abstract jobs then our society will boom. Though I do question what the less intelligent of us will do, perhaps they'll be fine if we can also curb social problems and get them all proper college education....
[url]http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Surviving_Progress/70235273?trkid=7085840[/url]
People like David Suzuki and Stephen Hawking have been talking about how progress isn't always positive for a while now.
I don't think we're in a good place for the future right now.
Since I was like 5 I've wondered how capitalism can be maintained in a society where an increasing amount of our workforce is automated
Seems like it maybe can't
Well I didn't know what capitalism was then but I thought 'hey if the future is gonna have fuckin robots everywhere how are people going to earn money'
[QUOTE=Riutet;41071153]Maybe, but then, I can draw, pretty well in fact, but I hate it so much that the moment I didn't have to draw anymore I promised myself I wouldn't do it again. Just because people are good at things doesn't mean they like what they are good at.[/QUOTE] certainly. i'm just saying that people tend to be naturally inclined towards using math and science in their lives, but the way it is presented in education tends to turn people off from the pursuit.
[QUOTE=smurfy;41071565]Since I was like 5 I've wondered how capitalism can be maintained in a society where an increasing amount of our workforce is automated
Seems like it maybe can't
Well I didn't know what capitalism was then but I thought 'hey if the future is gonna have fuckin robots everywhere how are people going to earn money'[/QUOTE]
Jobs move around when technology comes.
Basically if somebody introduces machinery to factories, whilst that could displace workers, remember that it also means you can reduce the price of your product.
If your goods are cheaper, that means people will have more money to spend on other things. This excess money eventually re-creates all of those extra jobs.
People always keep thinking that technology takes away jobs, but it doesn't. All that's going to happen is that things will get cheaper and more plentiful, and the reason why people work less is mostly because of laws, or that since wages are higher, you can afford to work less than other people.
I always found the luddites strange. They would smash machines that took away jobs, but they didn't beat up horses that took away jobs from people who pulled ploughs.
[QUOTE=lifehole;41071306]You can't force people to work in a certain field, and not everyone will ever have a unified view of the world and have unified desires in which way they want to work.[/QUOTE]
No but you can leverage what you love with what makes money. You want to get a useless degree in Art? cool, leverage it with 3D modeling or 3D printing or something that can make money, and progresses in something with a future.
[QUOTE=Tucan Sam;41071785]No but you can leverage what you love with what makes money. You want to get a useless degree in Art? cool, leverage it with 3D modeling or 3D printing or something that can make money, and progresses in something with a future.[/QUOTE]
If you seriously consider Art a useless degree, you haven't really looked hard enough.
[QUOTE=Patriarch;41072007]If you seriously consider Art a useless degree, you haven't really looked hard enough.[/QUOTE]
MBA, Political Science, etc etc. They are over populated and completely flooded job markets over in america.
Oh or English major, yeah that's a good one.
[QUOTE=ironman17;41068935]Well, it does kinda make sense; as automated processes become more reliable and affordable, there's less need for skilled human workers when a machine can do it efficiently. Still, there are some things that humans are still better at, like producing art and entertainment.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]"It was only an 'opless fancy,
It passed like an Ipril dye,
But a look an' a word an' the dreams they stirred
They 'ave stolen my 'eart awye!"[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Patriarch;41072007]If you seriously consider Art a useless degree, you haven't really looked hard enough.[/QUOTE]
A degree in art is pretty worthless.
The practical skills you might learn from an art course are the valuable things you take away from the course, and they can be acquired without taking a course without that much effort.
A person with a large portfolio of good quality work is worth so much more in the eyes of an employer than a guy with a small body of work and an Art degree.
You could just study something else while committing yourself to art in your free time and come away with two valuable sets of abilities, but a degree for the field where a degree actually matters.
Well, previously, this growth and technological advancement could easily be offset by simply moving somewhere else. At the time of the industrial revolution, there was a lot of unused land in the world. These days? It's becoming less and less feasible to simply go out on the figurative prairie and stake your claim.
We're at that special time mentioned in a lot of sci-fi stories where the human race starts shipping fucktons of people to colonies.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;41073266]Well, previously, this growth and technological advancement could easily be offset by simply moving somewhere else. At the time of the industrial revolution, there was a lot of unused land in the world. These days? It's becoming less and less feasible to simply go out on the figurative prairie and stake your claim.
We're at that special time mentioned in a lot of sci-fi stories where the human race starts shipping fucktons of people to colonies.[/QUOTE]
What the fuck does this even mean?
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;41073266]Well, previously, this growth and technological advancement could easily be offset by simply moving somewhere else. At the time of the industrial revolution, there was a lot of unused land in the world. These days? It's becoming less and less feasible to simply go out on the figurative prairie and stake your claim.
We're at that special time mentioned in a lot of sci-fi stories where the human race starts shipping fucktons of people to colonies.[/QUOTE]
we have plenty of unused land dude
[QUOTE=Tucan Sam;41073448]What the fuck does this even mean?[/QUOTE]What are you referring to, specifically?[QUOTE=yawmwen;41073462]we have plenty of unused land dude[/QUOTE]Yes, by technicality places like Death Valley and national parks are not used. [i]This is a good thing.[/i] However, you can't just go somewhere and say, "yes, I will open up an X store so I can sell those X things this place needs." There's zoning laws, permits, inspections, then there's the daunting task of making sure your local government actually [i]approves[/i] all of that. To build even a small commercial structure, you need approval that goes well beyond simply building a house. If you're planning to do something that has a slight possibility of "changing the image" of the local community, then you're fucked.
This is just one of the shortfalls of capitalism. Using such a system comes at a price.
[QUOTE=soccerskyman;41073869]This is just one of the shortfalls of capitalism. Using such a system comes at a price.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't call it a shortfall, the quality of life is always improving. The only way I see it as a "short fall" is being you actually have to be skilled in various fields and keep up to date with technological demands and needs.
[QUOTE=Tucan Sam;41073913]I wouldn't call it a shortfall, the quality of life is always improving. The only way I see it as a "short fall" is being you actually have to be skilled in various fields and keep up to date with technological demands and needs.[/QUOTE]
As more processes are automated, it will create more unemployed. As unemployment increases, competition for jobs increases, putting a downwards pressure on wages and upward pressure on work times. I'd call that a shortfall.
[QUOTE=soccerskyman;41073967]As more processes are automated, it will create more unemployed. As unemployment increases, competition for jobs increases, putting a downwards pressure on wages and upward pressure on work times. I'd call that a shortfall.[/QUOTE]
As more processes are automated the increase for skilled workers to make said processes, and maintain said processes increases as well.
USPS is a prime example of this, instead of adapting the the internet and it's role to mail/society they basically said "nah" now look at UPS/FedEx/DHS which did work with online companies and such and are booming.
[QUOTE=Tucan Sam;41074014]As more processes are automated the increase for skilled workers to make said processes, and maintain said processes increases as well.
USPS is a prime example of this, instead of adapting the the internet and it's role to mail/society they basically said "nah" now look at UPS/FedEx/DHS which did work with online companies and such and are booming.[/QUOTE]
This is assuming that the work needed to automate it is equal to the amount of work needed beforehand, which isn't always the case.
Hasn't this been known since well ages. And hasn't it become a problem in the past as well. For instance where you had disgruntled workers destroying machinery because they were under the belief that the machines were taking away their jobs.
Oh look, IT jobs are growing
Problem with anything IT related though is that the ratio of people who /actually/ know what they're doing compared to people who /think/ they know what they're doing just because they took an IT education
See: [URL]http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/02/why-cant-programmers-program.html[/URL]
[QUOTE=Tucan Sam;41069009]The problem is people don't seem to want to adapt to technologies changes. There are plent of jobs in the Science/Technology fields, not so much BMA or Arts majors[/QUOTE]
What? I'd argue that art majors are much more well off now than ever thanks to the internet and a push for stronger creative education (as creative individuals tend to adapt better to changing situations and demands put onto you by the workforce and new developments)
I think the real problem is that education/jobs are still assumed to just be things you "get" and getting an education means you get a job. This is no longer true, but all the perceptions in american society and how much education costs and everything relating to that tend to still assume that you just need any ol' degree and you'll get any ol' job. It's why people are ignorant enough to blow $15k+ a year at some terrible "get your degree in 2 years!!" private college only to have something that's worthless and they end up poor the rest of their lives.
[QUOTE=wraithcat;41074141]Hasn't this been known since well ages. And hasn't it become a problem in the past as well. For instance where you had disgruntled workers destroying machinery because they were under the belief that the machines were taking away their jobs.[/QUOTE]
started with the luddites in 1811
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.