Re: Robot apocalypse? - I think not
Also this: http://xkcd.com/652/
The enormous lump of shit sat steaming directly outside the publisher’s door facing the first-floor landing, welcoming early morning office workers as they arrived with a cheeful “Hello! I’m a giant turd! And I smell really bad!” Each member of staff who had chosen to begin work at 7.30am that day reacted the same way: …
"Christensen is a Thatcherite, I guess. Dockers should become engineers; miners should become programmers. Anyone without the capacity or inclination to retrain in a technical field should be treated with the contempt that thickos deserve: they should be abandoned or allowed to go into politics."
Well said. Of course, readers, don’t get complicit. Eventually programmers should become scientists; Engineers should become brain surgeons, etc...... and if you don’t then (in thatchers world) you’re a thicko and should be abandoned.
The problem of course is that it only takes one or two people to repair and maintain a larger number of robots. If two people can maintain,say, 100 robots, what are the other 98 people going to do?
about what happens when a computer finally passes the Turing test?
Soon after, my remote PC Support is via a chat session, and the "technician" works through a checklist asking questions and ticking off possible options. And 50 grillion Indians are without a job all of a sudden.
As machinery and technology continue to become more sophisticated and "intelligent", and as global population continues to soar, the employment situation will only continue to become more of a problem. We rely on machines on a daily basis at an exponential rate in all sectors... manufacturing, transportation, infrastructure. There will always be jobs to design and produce these increasingly-intelligent devices, but that will only serve to lower employment.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017