• May day, Anti-Capitalist protest clash with police force in Montreal. Canada
    143 replies, posted
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47653481]I've seen the video and frankly it either takes advantage of very specific situations or just breezes over things that are far more complex. Transportation services function within an extremely controlled environment, so it goes without saying that they could be easily automated. There are strict rules governing where a vehicle is not to be, how far it is to be from other vehicles, how fast it must go and so on. It's akin to having a person carry out specific repetitive tasks in a factory. Operating a crane for construction workers to install a piece of machinery, scaling steel beams with an impact wrench to get to a series of bolts that need tightening or removing wall panels in order to access a piping system that is blocked are all tasks that are not in a controlled environment, they are entirely different depending on the situation and involve intricate manipulation of the environment to-boot. It would be insanely expensive to develop robots that could deal with these situations and even more insanely expensive to develop centralized systems that would enable the constructed environment to do these things. While I hate to make assumptions, it really seems to me that anyone who proposes that most of the skilled trades could be replaced by robotic labour simply hasn't had much experience in blue collar work or just how challenging it is.[/QUOTE] There are architect association that tries to make a Giant 3d printer to build entire structures. I don't say that its gonna happen soon nor remove every single jobs. I think it might reduce the jobs of many sectors where only the top notch professional will remain to make sure that the automation is doing the things properly.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47653525]A crane is already just a robot controlled by a person. Creating an AI that could work in that situation would only require one to create sensors that would allow it to understand it's world around it. It really wouldn't be a big deal. At all.[/QUOTE] The job is far too contextual, the amount of devices that would have to be introduced just so the crane could know when to lift which parts of an object and where for any situation make the idea near infeasible. It's so much easier to just hire a single person to operate a crane as opposed to investing in the variety of potential indicators and sensors that would be required for an automated crane to even recognize which parts of an object would be fastened to what. [QUOTE=pac0master;47653539]There are architect association that tries to make a Giant 3d printer to build entire structures. I don't say that its gonna happen soon nor remove every single jobs. I think it might reduce the jobs of many sectors where only the top notch professional will remain to make sure that the automation is doing the things properly.[/QUOTE] The 3d printed house isn't all that special as all it just replaces the concrete pouring process (a process already heavily mechanized). One of the only differences is that instead of a contractor simply needing to chip wet cement to the site, it would instead have to ship factory made house components which are significantly harder to compress; all the other things in the house would have to be installed the old fashioned way, tradesmen. This of course ignores the fact that 3d printed concrete looks damned ugly and nobody would really want to live in it except for desperate poor people who wouldn't be able to afford it because concrete is an expensive material to make something as small as a house out of.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47653724]The job is far too contextual, the amount of devices that would have to be introduced just so the crane could know when to lift which parts of an object and where for any situation make the idea near infeasible. It's so much easier to just hire a single person to operate a crane as opposed to investing in the variety of potential indicators and sensors that would be required for an automated crane to even recognize which parts of an object would be fastened to what. The 3d printed house isn't all that special as all it just replaces the concrete pouring process (a process already heavily mechanized). One of the only differences is that instead of a contractor simply needing to chip wet cement to the site, it would instead have to ship factory made house components which are significantly harder to compress; all the other things in the house would have to be installed the old fashioned way, tradesmen. This of course ignores the fact that 3d printed concrete looks damned ugly and nobody would really want to live in it except for desperate poor people who wouldn't be able to afford it because concrete is an expensive material to make something as small as a house out of.[/QUOTE] I really don't think that's the case. I think it's very feasible. Much more feasible than you make it sound. Contextual thought patterns are not something that machines are by definition incapable of carrying out. Though, you have a very biased view of AI from what I've seen of your arguments with Ziks. It is easier to hire a single person, but if there's a method to do it without a person, though you're claiming it's utterly infeasible, nearly impossible, and just not worth it, I don't think that's the case and I'm sure much of the field that works on these things would vehemently disagree with you as well. But I'm not them and I'm not as versed as them, but I don't see as many logical problems as you're bringing up here that are "infeasible". For a computer to know what piece is next in it's order of things to do, and how it should best be dealing with that, doesn't seem "infeasible" by any definition of the word.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47653767]I really don't think that's the case. I think it's very feasible. Much more feasible than you make it sound. Contextual thought patterns are not something that machines are by definition incapable of carrying out.[/QUOTE] I'm not just talking about the ability of AI to learn things, we're talking about the necessary systems that would allow it to sense things and learn from them. However the added idea of installing a constructed brain capable of performing just as well or better than a human in extremely versatile situations in a crane so that you don't have to hire a guy for $30 an hour sounds absolutely laughable. The most basic manmade brains have never been a cheap, I can't imagine an insanely advanced man-made brain would be much cheaper. [QUOTE]It is easier to hire a single person, but if there's a method to do it without a person, though you're claiming it's utterly infeasible, nearly impossible, and just not worth it, I don't think that's the case and I'm sure much of the field that works on these things would vehemently disagree with you as well. But I'm not them and I'm not as versed as them, but I don't see as many logical problems as you're bringing up here that are "infeasible". For a computer to know what piece is next in it's order of things to do, and how it should best be dealing with that, doesn't seem "infeasible" by any definition of the word.[/QUOTE] It's not just a question of AI capabilities, it's a question of the physical mechanisms they control. These mechanisms do not come cheap and really how much faster could a robot possible scale steel supports than a skilled construction worker? Unless such a robot could work much faster than a single person in this situation, I don't see how automation is more profitable (given the hefty initial investment that such a robot would inevitably be).
I'm just saying it's vastly more possible than you may realize. The parts of a crane for instance, as you chose for your analogy, are already mechanically dealt with. The crane operator himself can be replaced entirely and those sensors are going to be something that comes from other technologies and is re purposed. We need better sensor systems for robots, that's a breakthrough that will ripples across all fields. And efficiency and accuracy would be worked on pretty hard to make it reliable enough to actually be a worthy long term investment.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47654139]I'm just saying it's vastly more possible than you may realize. The parts of a crane for instance, as you chose for your analogy, are already mechanically dealt with. The crane operator himself can be replaced entirely and those sensors are going to be something that comes from other technologies and is re purposed. We need better sensor systems for robots, that's a breakthrough that will ripples across all fields. And efficiency and accuracy would be worked on pretty hard to make it reliable enough to actually be a worthy long term investment.[/QUOTE] That's assuming it's possible to improve them. Most factories work with 50 year old technologies because there's simply no better way to move a part from point A to point B in the manufacturing process, there are limits to how fast a physical structure can go while still being intricate in its movements. All these visions of an automated society supporting an opulent paradise of equality sound more like a rent-seeker's fantasy than any kind of feasible societal structure.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47654208]That's assuming it's possible to improve them. Most factories work with 50 year old technologies because there's simply no better way to move a part from point A to point B in the manufacturing process, there are limits to how fast a physical structure can go while still being intricate in its movements. All these visions of an automated society supporting an opulent paradise of equality sound more like a rent-seeker's fantasy than any kind of feasible societal structure.[/QUOTE] Dude. we just need to make an AI that can do the job. No need to be perfect. It might start as some type of tools that the workers take with them then get more and more perfected and in 30 years Everything is built within an automated workshop then transported and assembled on the site. Look out for Modular building. They build every floors/rooms one by one and they are transported on site then a crane assemble Just like in the Tonka video game. [img]http://www.blujay.com/1/384/3001302_s1_i3.jpg[/img] They might not lose all their jobs but in the end it's possible that the construction sector will be greatly reduced to surveillance and maintenance. China are very good with modular construction. Here is an example [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwvmru5JmXk[/url]
[QUOTE=pac0master;47654274]Dude. we just need to make an AI that can do the job. No need to be perfect. It might start as some type of tools that the workers take with them then get more and more perfected and in 30 years Everything is built within an automated workshop then transported and assembled on the site. Modular building. Take a look at that.[/QUOTE] The whole purpose of developing an AI is so that you can teach it to do anything based on general knowledge. You wouldn't be able to program a robotic mechanism to do the jobs that I stated specifically given their versatility, you would require a constructed brain that is capable adapting to almost any situation. There is no AI that can just do the job as versatility is the key to AI from the outset. When it comes to the question of factory-made parts in construction, that is already widely employed; yet logistics gets in the way as it's incredibly cheaper to move easily compressible semi-processed materials than bulky partially constructed parts, so factory-made components hardly cut out the brunt of construction labour. There's a reason why welding is still an extremely profitable form of employment, you simply can't do all of the necessary welding on an automated assembly line when it comes to large structures. [editline]transnigger[/editline] [QUOTE]China are very good with modular construction. Here is an example [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwvmru5JmXk[/url][/QUOTE] This doesn't really show an amazing level of automation to be honest, all the conventional construction jobs could still apply (and seemt o given the people present in the footage). It just looks like it speeds up the process (assuming the logistical nightmare of transporting those massing steel panels could be efficiently dealt with). In the end though, I wouldn't be too quick to assume that construction projects under the Chinese managed economy are necessarily profitable or efficient, China has a bad reputation when it comes to construction.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47654312]The whole purpose of developing an AI is so that you can teach it to do anything based on general knowledge. You wouldn't be able to program a robotic mechanism to do the jobs that I stated specifically given their versatility, you would require a constructed brain that is capable adapting to almost any situation.[/QUOTE] The robotic industry is very versatile. We have many robots that works in many different industry with many different task. We don't necessary need AI for everything. Look at the Automobile assembly line. It's possible to make similar assembly for welding out trusses and beams for mass fabrication of buildings. [QUOTE]There is no AI that can just do the job as versatility is the key to AI from the outset.[/QUOTE] That's just a question of time. at one time. there were no computer capable of beating the best chess player. Computers are becoming cheaper and better over time which makes the human labour becoming obsolete and break some parts of the economy. It's just a question of time. [QUOTE] When it comes to the question of factory-made parts in construction, that is already widely employed, yet logistics gets in the way as it's incredibly cheaper to move easily compressible raw materials than bulky partially constructed parts, so factory-made components hardly cut out the brunt of construction labour.[/QUOTE] If the entire factory is automated, you can build modular component for much cheaper than if you were doing it with actual manpower. [QUOTE] There's a reason why welding is still an extremely profitable form of employment, you simply can't do all of the necessary welding on an automated assembly line when it comes to large structures.[/QUOTE] Maybe not yet but we can't claim that it will never be the case. Welding isn't a very difficult task for a machine. It's about the price. If you can make an assembly line that makes your stuff for cheaper than what the workers can do, then it will eventually become automated.
[QUOTE=pac0master;47654349]The robotic industry is very versatile. We have many robots that works in many different industry with many different task. We don't necessary need AI for everything. Look at the Automobile assembly line. It's possible to make similar assembly for welding out trusses and beams for mass fabrication of buildings. That's just a question of time. at one time. there were no computer capable of beating the best chess player. Computers are becoming cheaper and better over time which makes the human labour becoming obsolete and break some parts of the economy. It's just a question of time. If the entire factory is automated, you can build modular component for much cheaper than if you were doing it with actual manpower. Maybe not yet but we can't claim that it will never be the case. Welding isn't a very difficult task for a machine. It's about the price. If you can make an assembly line that makes your stuff for cheaper than what the workers can do, then it will eventually become automated.[/QUOTE] Look, all I'm saying is that there are limitations to how far certain technologies can be developed. Fundamentally a wheel will always be a circular mechanism on an axle. You can have whatever visions of the future you want, but just because we managed to get more space on smaller hard drives, make cheap printers or increase CPU clock speed does not mean will be able to build hyper intelligent lightning fast automated systems that will replace all of human labour and produce higher profits. That sort of technocratic heaven doesn't even seem to approach the limits of possibility in my eyes.
[QUOTE=Laferio;47648154]Police clashing outside? Better go buy some bags of milk.[/QUOTE] Who the fuck, buys bags of milk.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47654418]Look, all I'm saying is that there are limitations to how far certain technologies can be developed. Fundamentally a wheel will always be a circular mechanism on an axle. You can have whatever visions of the future you want, but just because we managed to get more space on smaller hard drives, make cheap printers or increase CPU clock speed does not mean will be able to build hyper intelligent lightning fast automated systems that will replace all of human labour and produce higher profits. That sort of technocratic heaven doesn't even seem to approach the limits of possibility in my eyes.[/QUOTE] All I am saying is that automation can be applied to many sectors. I ain't saying it will replace all jobs. It's just a question of time. Just the transportation industry for instance. Self Driving Vehicles will replace them sooner or later. That's millions of people that will end up jobless. It's possible that some software will be created that reduce the amount of people needed to design and build stuff. Technology evolve faster and that's a sad truth when it come to the Jobs. machine will take the place of many people. Maybe not everyone but a lot of us will be replaced for a more profitable set of machinery. Computers are only limited to the use we have for them. It's possible to make automation of any sectors. The thing is it require someone who wants to invest time and money into it to improve the design. Right now it is not cost effective. But it might become later. [QUOTE=Glue Factory;47654454]Who the fuck, buys bags of milk.[/QUOTE] Canadians does. I do :P [t]https://junkdrawer67.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/milk-bag.jpg[/t]
pac0master you should read some economic history. A lot of your claims are based on incorrect assumptions. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_unemployment"]Read this Wikipedia article[/URL] and you'll realized that people have had the same concerns about automation for hundreds of years.
[QUOTE=MoonlessNight;47656501]pac0master you should read some economic history. A lot of your claims are based on incorrect assumptions. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_unemployment"]Read this Wikipedia article[/URL] and you'll realized that people have had the same concerns about automation for hundreds of years.[/QUOTE] Economically speaking automation is very good. As long as there is people that works and pay taxes and buy stuff. As i said earlier. We had a small economy crisis during the 70's because most companies turned with automation at the same time and thousand over thousand of people were replaced. These people didn't had money to buy goods and many companies sales dropped so did the taxes budget. However. the automation of different sector is most likely to happen gradually. If it was to be sudden, it would probably cause a similar crash as what happened in the 30's Massive amount of people lose their jobs = less sales for companies = fire people = less taxes money for the government and it loop. However this loop can be broken with social welfare. If the government provide you a minimum money ( let's say 1000$ per month) then you can buy goods and the loop is broken. ( not entirely but it help a lot )
[QUOTE=pac0master;47657213]Economically speaking automation is very good. As long as there is people that works and pay taxes and buy stuff. As i said earlier. We had a small economy crisis during the 70's because most companies turned with automation at the same time and thousand over thousand of people were replaced. These people didn't had money to buy goods and many companies sales dropped so did the taxes budget.[/QUOTE] The economic crisis of the 70s was not because of automation. There are various reasons cited - the post-war boom not able to last forever, Keynesian economics of the time (reason why neoliberalism has since became popular), industrialisation of other countries affecting global trade and the oil crisis. But automation? Nope.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;47657283]The economic crisis of the 70s was not because of automation. There are various reasons cited - the post-war boom not able to last forever, Keynesian economics of the time, industrialisation of other countries affecting global trade and the oil crisis. But automation? Nope.[/QUOTE] It was most likely different in different regions. Here, a big part of it was caused by automation. The suden automation of hundred/thousand of industries/sectors created a drop in the jobs demand and many thousand people lost their job. I ain't saying that it is the only reasons but Here in Quebec, Canada it was one of them. As soon as the import fees were cancelled many companies turned for China and other Asian countries for cheap labour. Let say that didn't helped much
I know a couple of "communists" in my college. Those people are worst than hipsters when it comes to wanting attention and self-righteousness.
[QUOTE=pac0master;47657297]As soon as the import fees were cancelled many companies turned for China and other Asian countries for cheap labour. Let say that didn't helped much[/QUOTE] Except the direct result of that was an economic revolution which led to about half a billion people leaving poverty.
[QUOTE=Deng;47658770]Except the direct result of that was an economic revolution which led to about half a billion people leaving poverty.[/QUOTE] It's just sad to lose our job here and some people have to go bankrupt because of that. I bet Chinese are thankful for having our industries. I understand that. The problem is to replace the job of everyone who lost it. Thousand and thousand of people have to get an higher education to specialise themselves else they won't be able to find an interesting job that would last.
[QUOTE=pac0master;47659240]It's just sad to lose our job here and some people have to go bankrupt because of that. I bet Chinese are thankful for having our industries. I understand that. The problem is to replace the job of everyone who lost it. Thousand and thousand of people have to get an higher education to specialise themselves else they won't be able to find an interesting job that would last.[/QUOTE] If they're so desperate for last century jobs and living standards they can always just move to China.
[QUOTE=MoonlessNight;47659366]If they're so desperate for last century jobs and living standards they can always just move to China.[/QUOTE] You do realize not everyone has access to equivalent levels of education right? So your call for "BOOTSTRAPS BOOTSTRAPS BOOTSTRAPS" is a bit more than a shit ton of disingenuous horse shit.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47659382]You do realize not everyone has access to equivalent levels of education right? So your call for "BOOTSTRAPS BOOTSTRAPS BOOTSTRAPS" is a bit more than a shit ton of disingenuous horse shit.[/QUOTE] It just comes off as backwards to me. Is it not good thing that the value of human work increases?
[QUOTE=MoonlessNight;47659496]It just comes off as backwards to me. Is it not good thing that the value of human work increases?[/QUOTE] Sure it's a good thing But does the context of that being built on the backs of little more than wage slaves make that such a beautiful thing?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47659774]Sure it's a good thing But does the context of that being built on the backs of little more than wage slaves make that such a beautiful thing?[/QUOTE] The past 35 years has seen a couple of hundred million Chinese achieve massive improvements to their general standard of living and quality of life. Describing people in China as "wage slaves" is rather deplorable.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.